/metatech/ - /tech/ Meta Discussion

Should there be some kind of Windows 10 containment thread? It's suggested and complained about a lot.

>>868

I think we should make a page like https://8ch.net/tech/chrome.html except for Windows, to explain why Windows cannot be secure. That way instead of having to round up all the evidence and arguments we can just link/copypasta that. It would simplify the response to threads like this https://8ch.net/tech/res/342605.html

>>868

As far as I can see, all of the Windows 10 threads that pop up that I've seen wouldn't be able to fit in a single thread. All it would do is drown out discussion. I would gladly go with what >>869 said and make a dedicated W10 page, though. That would be very useful.

>>870

good idea with the extra page. should probably also mention the problems with backported 7 and 8.1 updates.

>mfw /tech/ switches to vista except for the few linux nerdbeards

Everything's pretty good. I don't have anything to complain about, right now.

>>874

so you want to ban them?

I think career advice should have threads removed as it should be in the tech support sticky

>>875

I don't know if I'd say ban, but a lot of the questions revolve more around degrees and money, rather than technology. It's mostly just fishing to see if there's money in tech.

Such threads belong in /biz/ or an edu board if there is one.

You've been doing a better job lately than in recent months. I'm bretty happy

If you see a /pol/ mod please dickpunch them though, they're terrible

>>875

tech support is for tech support, not career advice.

>>874

the tech support threads give out real advice. if the board was 100% shitpost trolling a heap of people would leave.

>don't want on /tech/

less crying about not 100% on topic threads.

we are on an image board, there is little reason to ask for more rules.

Other websites are better suited for the "super serious" topic demand such as actual forums dedicated to projects.

I also see a lot of people bashing /pol/ which i do not agree with but as long as the janitors don't actively start removing edgy posts its alright

>>874

>our post rate is low

>i know lets start alienating people so that people become even more post shy

I'm pretty OK with how things are, the issues with the constant Windows 10 threads have already been brought up by >>868 and >>869, that's the only real bone I have off the top of my head

>>878

rather then "technology support" it would be "/tech/ support" as in support for anything involving the technology sphere rather then the technology itself

>>881

why not remove more threads that purely exist because of OP NOT READING THE FUCKING STICKY so we get less useless threads revolving around "hay /g/ /tech/ wat phone/distro/windows is gud??????"

>>882

did I say anything about that? Learn to reading comprehension.

>>883

>implying i was disagreeing with you

>>885

>1. I feel like we're not vocal enough about threads we don't like. Civility is one thing, but hide and ignore doesn't work. I think our natural spergy hostility the reason why the board was better before this summer; shitty threads would instantly be filled with the BQDF Board Quality Defence Force saging and calling OP a nigger faggot. It encouraged newbies to lurk and kept "ironic" shitposting to a minimum.

it only works so much until you trigger enough autists that starts dropping a carpet bomb of counter-sages, until the thread hits the bump limit

>2. Off-topic is fine, but if you're going to have a 100 reply argument Lennart Poettering's sexual orientation in a thread about intel backdoors, please sage.

>100 reply argument Lennart Poettering's sexual orientation

what

pls post link

>3. How do you feel about ID's on /tech/?

desparately needed in order to provide samefag retardant

>>886

>it only works so much until you trigger enough autists that starts dropping a carpet bomb of counter-sages, until the thread hits the bump limit

Still better than Newfags and shitposter getting away with shitting up the board.

>pls post link

I used that as an example because it seemed likely to happen sometime in the future.

>>885

1. Link them? I'm not seeing any.

2. Sure, I suppose. Makes sense to me.

3. I usually delete threads that ask the same questions the information stickies can provide the answers to; however, you need to have some discussion about them. The pages aren't an end-all, be-all resource. Information gets outdated. Outright banning all browser and email threads is a no.

>>888

Oh, and just for the record, Early 404 deletes threads with less than 10 replies by page 5. Enabled it for now. Let's see how it works out.

And nice trips :^)

>>889

I think that's just going to preserve shitposting like OS flamewars while deleting the niche threads early, sorry. I don't like that at all. Those shitposting threads are high traffic, while the niche threads are slow.

Why did you ignored my plea to get >>>/electronics/ in the recommended board list?

I would like an official response about the subject since I don't see how it doesn't fill the criteria, unless the criteria it's your self judgement in which case, carry on.

>>891

Vaguely recall that. Don't remember why I turned you down. I think it was because there were only a few posts at the time. I'll add it.

>>890

True. Adding onto that, even some inane shitposts that get enough replies would get past the early 404. The main things the early 404 would help with are raids and spam, but we already have max threads-per-hour enabled, so it's superfluous for that.

>>892

Yee, there must be about the same quantity of posts since that too, so it's your discretion, I submitted it that time just to see if it could catch steam, I'm not even the owner just an unpaid shill.

Snip all of the "how do i into compyootr kareer" threads. Same with the /b/v/pol/ "how do i GAHNOO SLASH LONIX /tech????????" threads as well. People piss themselves about "MUH FREEDOM UH SPEECH" constantly but the only reason they're actually spewing that shit is so they can force their own garbage all over other boards like missionaries; I come to /tech/ to talk and read about resource usage and teaching programming in schools as a mandatory course, not about someone's completely not-/tech/ shitty life decisions or views on Nazi Germany.

MikeeUSA was also posting again.

>>885

>>886

>3. How do you feel about ID's on /tech/?

Friendly Board Quality Defence Force reporting in.

I'm absolutely against IDs. It's tripfagging in disguise even with per-thread IDs. I want to see arguments, not redditors. I can switch arguments and side now here now there just to falsificate my own assumptions. Unveiling identities != quality (also, it's not how I learned imageboards)

Also, Tor

I second all your other requests/observations

The board is going to shit.

No one follows the rules, recommendations and tech support threads are everywhere, but worst of all, the people help those poor fucker.

The community is the worst part right now, they shitpost left and right, they call shills left and right, they use flags as fucking avatars and copypaste useless tutorials or shitpastas everywhere (like that linux mint guy)

We need mods that swing the banhammer and swing it hard. If only we could get some /a/ meido to help, because /tech/'s moderation team is too passive.

Some of you may think; "uh, it's the win10 phase, it'll pass". Bullshit, those people are molding /tech/ into something they like, i.e: utter shit, and after that's done (not much is left), they'll stay.

I'd recommend:

-only one Windows 10 on the catalog (Urgent), better yet, no duplicate threads of any kind.

-2 week bans for those that don't post in support threads.

-warnings for those faggots that spew shill and jew everywhere and a ban to those who keep up that bullshit.

-clean the sticky (it's a bit messy right now);

-Those /tech/chrome.html kind of pages are exellent, it'd be cool if we all managed, here in /metatech/ to rebuild the sticky and make more of those pages. I think for example we need a /tech/browser.html page, something that mentions stuff like https://www.privacytools.io/#browser and with hyperlinks to installgentoo and stuff.

Could someone please turn "FSociety" from Mr. Robot into an Augmented Reality Game?

(Ask about "Toonami" in %E2%96%B3 )

I dig this place a lot. Can't think of any fixes atm.

We need stricter moderation. Can you please ban the autists posting pointless poser comments when somebody wants to discuss something they don't like?

>>900

This needs to be enforced. There are so many threads about consumer tech, and all the others are for windows 10/ systemd. All of the "novelty" posts are not funny, and just shit up threads. Mods should add incremental bans, sort of like /r9k/s robot. 5 minutes for the first offense, 10 for the next, and so on.

>>900

Stricter moderation is not fun. This is 8chan, after all.

Although I'm all for banning all the /pol/ memes, they're 0% tech, they're just /pol/ propaganda.

>>902

/leftypol/ gtfo

Why is

>>>/tech/357614

not a sticky?

It should be a sticky.

Please sticky until October 9.

>>904

How is "do you prefer headphones or earphones, I personally prefer headphones" a recommendation thread? He's explicitly saying he already has something, and it's not a discussion of specific products.

Anyway, the problem with the recommendation threads I delete isn't that they're recommendation threads, but that they're created for a single person with very little interest to other people. They're not quite tech support, but close. Someone just made a thread because he has a personal problem and wants people to solve it for him.

"Surprisingly useful utilities" is interesting to a lot of people, on the other hand. "Is there a browser that doesn't suffer from the things /tech/ complains about, if not, let's make one" is also not a personal support thread.

That's just my view of it, though. I don't know what the board owner thinks. But the rule could use some clarification/narrowing down.

4 stickies too much?

>>904

When it comes to defining tech support/advice, etc. threads, I mainly go with what >>906 said. (I really need to give him an account for this board...) Sometimes I miss some threads, so if you think it might break the rules, please report them, as I've always said.

Also, I'm planning on leaving the announcement up for 1 more day, and then putting this thread on autosage on the 7th.

>>908

>he hasn't seen the previous 4th stickies

stop deleting posts your shit mod team dislikes. the board should be free just as the software. more moderation =/= quality

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hash: SHA1

>>909

>I really need to give him an account for this board...

I could sign my messages like this to prove my identity. But I don't have the "Advanced tripfagging, Inc" script any more.

https://ghostbin.com/paste/b8hns/raw

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJV6K5fAAoJECYYOyU2qZyyP+EH/jJ6keEYfp060g+XMpHVIOSz

FxpqhDdZte3zbNPpHdeSbLQbVYZ9uCh6xOW1y3cC41Aon695PyvY1WDqT9jEsY3Y

cTe+JKpbnCxSCDBsDUFIg5KnyjbIKDj3crrekv+jSeUf1t8mBafsXK8ZNFKEr8Rd

5d5vw7Yc8+AHBHP+0SRBoLVw7aCDb6ULNyjXvpJP7VuFywuik9QXIHBEI/GEXcdq

tYyEc1vfVy8XDEjhId55gk4GM73YXZgW0buf8D4Ak0F8LzdMXseZ+vELv/EJlvnD

m3OlbYKoZKl2iyd+xTNpdEmeu6npvreuHtlUVdXWvXKR4J6nedqqGBlVGEH7Goc=

=kU85

-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

>>910

Can you give some examples of the posts we shouldn't have deleted?

>>911

>Advanced tripfagging, Inc

So, it's you! I polluted the keyservers with keys more trusted than yours to prove you how idiot your move was ( https://paste.debian.net/310317/ )

gpg-tripfagging is utter. cancer. Stop it, idiot. Tripfagging is enough and should be kept at a minimum.

I'm totally against you hotpocketing anything.

>>896

>I'm absolutely against IDs. It's tripfagging in disguise even with per-thread IDs.

Using per-thread ID's are in no way like tripfagging. With or without ID's, any shitposter, tripfag or not, can derail a thread with ease. If anything, ID's just make them easier to spot and hide.

>Unveiling identities != quality

It's true that it won't directly improve the overall quality of the board just by having them, but they do deter small-time shitposters and samefags. Plus they would be nice for tech support and consumer advice threads.

>>914

>are in no way like tripfagging

They totally are, you are bound to an ID. That's exactly what tripfagging does: bind your post to an ID. If IDs are per-thread, the harm is limited, still they serve and work exactly like trips.

>With or without ID's, any shitposter, tripfag or not, can derail a thread with ease.

So, those are not only harmful, but plain useless.

>If anything, ID's just make them easier to spot and hide

>spot

Self-moderation placebos (hiding) aren't a reason good enough, and I'm not interested in spotting anyone at all. See

>>896

> I want to see arguments, not redditors. I can switch arguments and side now here now there just to falsificate my own assumptions

>but they do deter small-time shitposters and samefags

shitposters will shitpost no matter what. real samefags and shills can switch IP with ease - it's a tech board, right? The board is low traffic still, there's not that big influx of small shitposters raiding'n' shit.

Also, Tor.

>Plus they would be nice for tech support and consumer advice threads.

Standard replies are more then enough so far imho; I don't think you can turn them on just in cyclic threads, and those threads won't justify an overall adoption.

>>913

It was not me, I just downloaded the script of the guy who did it when he posted a link to it somewhere. That was j3imi, like the keys say - he isn't on https://8ch.net/metatech/contact.html . I have an account for this board now, so I won't have to do that.

how about 2 day bans for every question that can be answered by copy/pasting their question into google?

bit harsh? ok.

how about 1 day bans for clean unambiguous bullshit like "how to we fix computer" in the tech thread.

>>917

I don't think that would help. People make tech support threads because they don't know they are required to go to the sticky, in more than 90% of cases. Deleting their thread, sometimes with a short notice, is enough to at least stop them from posting a new tech support thread.

Banning them like this wouldn't be to stop them from posting tech support threads, but only to punish them. I don't like to use bans that way, because it doesn't solve anything.

If someone reposts their tech support thread after it's deleted I give them a short ban, usually one hour, telling them to go to the sticky and not repost their thread. I rarely need to do that, and nobody reposted their thread after that.

You might get the impression that it's the same people posting tech support threads all the time, but it's really just people from other boards looking for tech support and visiting /tech/ for the first time.

How do you apply for a volunteer?

Can you please take a look at

">>851

Ok then Techie,

Can you please give me a reason why the bump limit is set at 300 for the two main stickys?

>>181463 and >>181464

▶Anonymous 09/04/15 (Fri) 10:42:13 847fde No.919

Hi Techie

Can you please respond to >>866

Also see https://8ch.net/tech/res/181463.html#q359769

Can you please call for more mods as the current shitpost situation has got to the option where it's effecting the tech support and probably consumer advice sticky.

I've made a couple of suggestions in the above post.

Regards

Anon"

https://8ch.net/metatech/res/512.html#q919

Regards

Anon

>>921

The reply limit applies to all threads, you can't set it for cyclical threads individually.

The difference between the damage done and the damage done if there had been a much higher bump limit isn't that big. It disrupted the thread, but removed only 25% of its posts.

Raising the bump limit might still be a good idea.

I'm sick of my threads getting deleted in favor of much worse threads.

I suggest banning immigrants that bring /g/ "culture" over here (e.g. saying "install gentoo" at anyone they judge hasn't spent enough hours googling and reading forum threads before posting)

>>904

Which threads of yours were deleted?

>at anyone they judge hasn't spent enough hours googling and reading forum threads before posting)

>spoonfeed me

nothanks

>>925

fuck off retard

>>926

You seem upset. It's probably because you are incompetent and asked a stupid question, and had your shit support thread deleted.

Hilarious.

>>923

Can you give examples? Nothing is going to happen if you only make vague complaints like that.

When posts are deleted, they're gone. I have no way to find out which threads you made.

Also another thing, can you consider deleting blog posts? For example blog posts detailing failed escapades into installing software, and why that software is shit. They're just bait threads, they just lead to guaranteed replies telling OP how fucking stupid he is.

>>930

this

its usually either a /v/irgin or a shill trying to say GNU/Linux sucks

I don't know what to do about it, but it looks like a lot of people are unaware that desktop threads are not allowed

Maybe make it clear that /tech/ is not the 8chan version of 4chan /g/.

I feel exactly like >>897 but I think his recommendations are a bit too strict.

Maybe make a sticky thread about browsers and/or distro shilling recommendations, I don't like too many stickies, but the board is filled with those threads.

Is banning desktop threads really a good idea? Does one thread at a time hurt?

Can a pseudo-mod delete clearly duplicated threads and personal tech support requests? I see that they disappear sometimes, but some are lingering for too long and are constantly bumped

>>936

desktop threads are literally worse than hitler with cancer

there's >>>/g/ for those

and it's cancer

there's plenty of choice for ricers

>ring hidden 16 minutes /tech/ Spoilered file from post #368885

Whhhaaat? Only "Spoilered file"?

It is a "ART MODELS FORUM Boy&Girl 3-12Y!!New Update!!" thread - should get deleted on sight

https://archive.is/pRHe6

Are you high?

>>942

Probably waiting for a global moderator to handle it.

By US law, all illegal images must be reported to NCMEC.

>>943

There's no US Law requiring a volunteer/site owner to submit to NCMEC; the MUST requirement is not a SHOULD requirement.

The problem is that there are very few Global Volunteers, and only Global Volunteers can submit to NCMEC it seems.

I'd bet that it's more illegal not to delete than to wait for Godot. The only MUST requirement is: delete the fucking CP

>hey, officer, I was just waiting for someone else to remove it, even if I had the power to remove it

Moreover, assuming that Global Volunteers react fast enough (it's not the case, but let's assume it for the sake of arguing), a mere "Spoilered file" action from the Board Volunteer is... nothing. Could have at least additionally bumplocked and/or locked the thread.

Side note: we all know that the pedo spammer(s) use proxies, there's little to no reason to let their baits linger in the board.

(btw, new pedo bait in >>>/tech/376344 )

>>945

>the MUST requirement is not a SHOULD requirement.

*the MUST requirement is a SHOULD requirement.

>zerosugar hidden 2 minutes /tech/ Deleted post #376344

Bravo zerosugar

>>945

>There's no US Law requiring a volunteer/site owner to submit to NCMEC

Yes there is.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2258A