No.198[Last 50 Posts]
Let me know how we're doing and/or how we can improve or change.
If you want something more functionally changed, here's what I can touch but I can't make custom CSS for shit.
No.199
Poster IDs
ban vivix
No.200
Also I have no idea what "Automatically convert … to …" is or if I should have it enabled/disabled.
No.201
>>199>Poster IDsI've already been told to keep that disabled, I'll wait until I get more people in favor/against it before making a final decision.
Reply to this post with
>in favor IDsor
>against IDsto make it easy to keep track of.
>ban vivixI apologize in their stead if they bother you, but I'm not Judge Judy.
No.202
Forced anon would be better than banning him
No.203
No.205
>>202Forced anon would mean IDs go on.
No.210
>>205explain what ids are before i have an opinion on this.
No.212
>>210IDs are a small string of letters and numbers at the top of all of your posts. It's used to prevent samefagging and to make conversations within a crowd of anonymous users less confusing as you'd know who you're talking to.
The ID is only identical within a single thread, posting in another thread will give you a different ID.
No.215
IDs are for fags. No IDS.
No.217
>>201>in favor IDsthank you.
No.219
No.221
>>200basically it converts 3 periods to a dedicated single-character ellipsis I believe.
No.234
IDs suck, no IDs
No.239
IDs are shit, fuck that.
No.259
>>201>in favor IDsAnyone who isn't just wants to shitpost and samefag.
No.263
>>259>shitpostingThe whole concept that there is something like shitposting is invented by newfag babies that can't deal with the *chan culture.
Kill yourself.
No.266
>>263Right, because having to scroll past the masturbatory lol i trol u bullshit before hitting the real discussion is a good thing and not a total waste of time, I forgot.
No.268
>>219>>234>>239>>263muh thick skin, muh shitposting, everyone should put up with my terrible low tier trolling! N-no, why doesn't anyone like me and wants me to go away? Everyone's the problem not me!!
No.270
>>201the obsidian succubutt union is in favor of IDs
No.278
yes gib IDs
No.286
for IDs, no reason not to have them
No.303
Current standings are 6 in favor versus 4 against. You guys duke it out longer, it's too close to make a final decision now. Word of warning though, I'll interpret multiple votes from the same person as zero.
>>221lmbo why even
No.306
>>303It's two whole characters shorter! It'll save sooo much server space!
Yeah I dunno either.
No.318
>>201Refer to screenshot, since apparently this 8chan site thought my post was from a bot and decided it should be discarded. I'm not impressed.
No.326
>>318You can't vote multiple times, it differentiates individual posters for me.
You posted in the banner and lewd threads.
No.333
IDs are bad for a board where pictures you post can be traced to your avatar. It removes anonymity and results in reddit mentality.
Against IDs
No.334
IDs can easily be circumvented by a webproxy and will do more harm than good.
Terrible idea.
No.335
No.336
No.337
>>268>>266>attempting to imply IDs even being to start to attempt to try to even remotely curb shitposting>>333Anonymity is absolutely positively crucial and stealing it from us in what's supposed to be a safe place away from 4chan is batshit insane. IDs would ruin this board more swiftly than any amount of shitposted ever could.
>>326In that case there's literally no point to IDs at all. I'm
>>336 >>239 don't interpret this as more than a single vote, your ID-bias is showing.
No.340
> against IDs
SecondLife is a game with a login name. I do not mind being associated with what I say, but other people like their false sense of security and taking that away from them will just make less people post, which is the opposite of what the board needs right now.
No.341
>>337And remember, you can choose to post with an ID if you really want to attention whore that bad, it's called a tripcode.
No.343
>>341I don't see how anonymity is in any way helpful to worthwhile discussion, especially when most people can be identified by their typing anyway when they're actually making a post where they say something rather than firing off a one-line >implying or something like that. The only time it makes people actually anonymous is when they're shitposting or trying to not look like the same person, because it's not like more than twenty people post in the SL threads anyway.
No.346
>>343Forced IDs only reinforce the hugbox you describe and absolutely destroy anyone's chance of having an honest discussion as well as completely alienating outsiders. Considering how godawful slow this board already is, that's not really realistic.
There has been no shitposting problem at all on /sl/, which is the most damning proof that /sl/ does not need forced IDs - they will only serve to halve the already tiny population of this board.
No.348
>>346>destroy anyone's chance of having an honest discussion Why does honesty only exist without identity? That feels like you're setting up a false dichotomy. And we're not even talking about consistent thread-to-thread identity, just internal consistency within a thread, which would make back-and-forth conversations (explanations, answering questions, helping someone with something, which happens a fair amount in SL threads) easier to follow.
>There has been no shitposting problem at all on /sl/Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence -- just because a thing hasn't happened in the two days this thing has existed is hardly proof of anything, I'd argue. After all, if this thing takes off, there will eventually be a full exodus of /slg/'s population, shitposters included. I'm sure you've been around long enough to see entire threads wasted because people are chimping out that someone might be a pony or a lewdie or whatever the bogeyman-of-the-day is, or just talking shit about someone else when all the rest of us would like to move on but a handful of folks just ride it like the bandwagon it is. Remember that the shit that led to the latest group being created? That took three threads to resolve, and attempting to actually use the threads to discuss SL or post images was fucking unbearable throughout.
I'll grant it's entirely fair to note that with an entire board, it might be easier to segregate "post neat images", "post your avatar", and "post shit about other people" into their own separate threads, so the notion of an entire thread going off the rails might be less of a concern.
In the end, if discussion moves over here then I'll post here regardless, with or without IDs; I'm not married to the idea. But at the very least I'd like to make a fair case for something that /b/ (of all places!) did ages ago, and it clearly hasn't hampered honest discussion over there, and it feels like the only argument for no IDs is kinda flimsy.
No.349
>>348A forced identity brings pre-conceived notions and the fear of consequences for your actions. Since we know damn well the patrons here cannot be trusted to not grief, not discriminate, and not weaponize whatever we may post, it's definitely not something that would 'help' at all.
You can bring your own ID, that's what the name is for. You can prevent it from being jacked, that's what tripcodes are for. Some people don't want to be linked to their posts for the vast, sweeping consequences it could hold for them, and that's a legitimate concern, even if IDs change thread to thread it's still extremely dangerous to force them on everybody when you can just do it for yourself and leave those who prefer to err on the side of caution and not being ostracized/attacked, or in extreme cases, having their lives and livelihoods threatened.
I don't see how live and death is a flimsy argument.
No.350
>>349because you're going to get killed for calling someone a faggot on the internet
No.351
>>349People wanting to dodge the consequences of their actions is the primary reason for the caustic two-faced "friend in-game, bitch in-thread" phenomenon, so that's hardly defensible -- and it's addressing the notion of global IDs anyway, not thread-specific IDs. People can still choose to divorce their shit-talking from their in-game identities if they want.
Please tell me I'm not supposed to give a serious response to the "life and death" bit. I just can't do it with a straight face.
No.352
>>351I tripfag because of that two-faced crap.
No.368
>>351That's the point, though - you can only have honest discussion when you're not going to be brutally punished for your opinion. Thus, the First Amendement.
>>350It's happened, but I mainly meant people who are forced to pretend they're someone they're not in the real life, because those consequences can range from losing your place of residence to losing your life if someone investigates hard enough. I've had it happen to too many friends.
>>352That is the option that is left open to people who insist on IDs - tripcodes are the exact same as IDs but voluntary, allowing for all the benefits these people whinge on about without endangering the relationships and sometimes even the safety of others.
If you are for IDs, use a fucking tripcode, it's not that hard. It's easy for you to type Rahfnek#niggerfaggotdicks, it's hard for me to find a new place to live. Jesus, you only have to type it once, the board will save it for you or your browser will.
No.375
>>368>endangering the relationships and sometimes even the safety of othersI really just cannot take you seriously when you say shit like this, and you keep parroting it over and over, which suggests that I'm not going to be able to get an intelligent conversation out of you. So, I'm conceding here, because continuing is a waste of both our time. I've made my case for IDs, and I'll go with whatever option people end up favoring, because it doesn't much affect me since I don't shitpost and I don't care for celebrity. But seriously look over this conversation sometime in a few days, because this is some tinfoil hat shit here and I think you're just too close to see it.
No.386
>>326Ah, I see. If IDs stay off, I wish to know whom all board mods and volunteers are. I don't trust you guys.
No.387
>>368What opinion are you going to be brutally punished for?
No.394
>>386I'm the only one moderating this place, Fredrick (8chan's sysop/owner) changed the capcodes.
>If your capcodes are not working, that is because they have been changed to "Global Volunteer" and "Board Volunteer" as a result of legal advice I received today. (Sept. 21st)I don't know why you don't trust me though, I'm trying to let you guys run this place more than me. You know, voting and suggestions et cetera. All I do is kinda clean up after people (happened only once so far, good job guys), change settings, and let people know what's going on.
Post ID standings are:
>7 votes in favor>9 votes againstStill too close, continue voting and debating (stop using hyperbole)
I implore anyone with concerns that don't involve poster IDs to please post about it.
No.396
>>394Don't take my distrust as lack of appreciation for your efforts. It's simply a result of enough time spent on the internet. Some people I've discovered are, sadly, simply not trustworthy. Who are you?
No.399
No.424
i don't know how to feel about the whole id thing. everyone keeps saying "it'll stop shitposting" and other people say "it'll make people leave" (which is blatant bullshit btw) and no one can seem to decide what the fuck having a trip by your name will actually do for the board.
No.431
>against ids
only way to curb shitposting is to provide valid content i've decided
No.438
Aw shit. We got a Second Life Board.
Are you guys going to try to bring in the community of half chan /vg/ to come here?
I know a couple of them wanted to get their own board for a while.
No.447
>>438who do you think made it and populates most of the board?
No.455
>>424there's no way it would stop shitposting but at least ID's would significantly slowdown samefagging and make things a bit easier to follow.
people seem to think Id's means mandatory trips or something though based on their arguments. I really fail to see how thread specific Id's ruin the anon culture.
i guess i'm tentatively for ID's on a sidenote is there any quick and dirty way to spoiler text here? ctrl S was my standby but that doesnt seem to be working
No.474
No.481
No.484
Against IDs
No.514
>>217I'm against IDs, hopefully we can revisit it after we're settled in.
No.539
>>455see
>>334They don't do shit.
Also learn to TeX you nerd.
No.729
>>539$$/left[/frac{testing}{TeX}\right]$$
No.731
>>729$${/huge WHY CAN'T I EVER FRACTIONTEXT?}$$
No.774
No.775
aaaaa
No.990
Because people have stopped voting, i'm going to consider the current standings final.
The current standings are:
>7 in favor
>13 against
I will not enable IDs unless there is overwhelming request for a revote.
I'd also like to note that I was personally in favor of IDs, but due to me being in an administrative position have decided to not count my own vote.
I guess since people aren't really providing issues I'm going to give a questionnaire for you all.
• Is the subtitle "It's A Feature™" okay?
• Do we want country flags?
• Do we want oekaki?
• Do we want dice rolling?
• Is 1 image per post good enough? If not, how many?
No.992
>>990>• Is the subtitle "It's A Feature™" okay?No opinion. I'll leave that to people older and wiser in the ways (and foibles) of SL.
>• Do we want country flags?That'd be very nearly the same as adding IDs, since all someone would have to do is see the country flag and recognize the typing style, since we've only got a handful of people from most places other than the USA. In fact, it would be worse, since IDs could be circumvented (if someone was really paranoid and desperately needed to not be tied to some comment) by using a different device, whereas that wouldn't change your country flag.
Personally I was in favor of IDs too, but I accept that the majority is paranoid about being connected to their shitposts.
>• Do we want oekaki?I know there's been some silly MSPaint fun on /slg/ so it might be neat, but I don't know.
>• Do we want dice rolling?Doesn't seem like there's a need.
>• Is 1 image per post good enough? If not, how many?I've seen multi-image posts in other boards before and it just looks weird. I feel like one per post keeps people from just dumping all their images at once, and encourages some discussion or at least commentary on a per-image basis. Given there's been a total of ten posts in the past 24 hours or so, condensing that further feels pointless.
No.993
>>990i dont really care about the other stuff, but fuck no to multiple images per post. it looks really ugly
No.1010
>>539$$\left[\frac{shittin}{life}\right]$$
No.1025
Is it possible to get max images per post raised to like 3, or 5, or something that isn't one?
No.1026
>>1025Please no. See
>>992 >>993, it's ugly and needless, and on such a dead board, enabling single-post image dumps rather than encouraging discussion of individual images seem like a pointlessly bad idea.
No.1040
>>539redtextstrikeitalicbold No.1041
>>1040Well that's weird. Mid-line redtext didn't work but it works on its own line maybe?
==redtext==
strike italic bold No.1063
>>539Redtext unit testStrikethrough unit test``Italics unit test``
```Bold unit test```
Code unit test
$$f$$ $$a$$ $$n$$ $$c$$ $$y$$
spoiler unit test$$\color{orange}{neat}$$
Everything at once:
`` ``` $$ayy$$
No.1064
>>1063Dice rolling is broken, italics are broken, bold is broken, fancy is broken, color is broken.
No.1068
>>1064Dice rolling isn't enabled (actually read the thread you're replying to and you'd know), you're using ` instead of ' for italics (
works just fine) and bold (
also works fine). All $$ tags appear not to work.
No.1069
No.1329
do it
No.1351
>>1329Not to imply that I'm against it, but before making a decision I'd like to know what the board would gain or possibly lose from archiving.
No.1356
>>1351Doesnt seem that necessary considering the speed of the board but it'd be nice to have archiving for any freebie or travel guide threads that pop up, just so we never lose them
As for negatives...I cant really think of any
No.1369
No.1563
Custom Flags are here, Public User List is coming:https://8chan.co/meta/res/25353.htmlFlags can be chosen manually or ignored completely when posting, making it a voluntary form of identification.
This brings up new questions
• Do we want to use custom flags?
• Does anyone have photoshop skills to make custom flags? (I don't)
• What are some clever flags that we can come up with that play off of SL tropes and user 'archetypes'?
Heads up about the public user list, this account will show up as "Quas" because 8chan's moderation system was a load of garbage when /sl/ was created. Literally one moderator account per board was possible. I'm not sure when they changed it but it's too late to fix now. At least they added the "Board Owner" capcode to help with confusion. I guess now is the best time to introduce myself to you guys.
HELLO I AM TOASTAnd finally I'd like to touch on a new moderation practice I'm going to employ. If for any reason an anonymous poster divulges information that you consider "private", you may petition to have it removed. See more on the updated rules page.
https://8chan.co/sl/rules.htmlThis will fully go into effect once I create an email address for this sole purpose, until then use the report feature.
No.1564
>>1563Qaus*
STOP BEING ANAL No.1566
>>198here's my suggestion: make a sticky to answer questions about what the hell second life is so we can avoid these kind of threads being carried out later.
No.1567
>>1566Good idea, I'll make one now. Do you have any questions or suggestions regarding
>>1563 ?
No.1568
>>1567based board owner actually hearing people out. in regards to
>>1563 i think custom flags would be fun, but i don't have the skills required to make one that wouldn't suck.
No.1574
right now threads seem to stop being bumped long before they hit the limit. is there a way to fix that?
No.1575
>>1574It might just be a dumb quirk that 8chan has but I'll look into it to make sure. Is it seemingly random or does it happen consistently after a certain postcount?
No.1580
>>1574>>1575It's just a 300 post bump limit, that's all. You're accustomed to /vg/ so it seems short. Someone just needs to make a new thread.
No.1591
>>1580>>1575It's dumb though. as long as you can still keep posting, the thread should keep getting bumped.
I wouldnt mind if it was just capped at 300 posts but scrolling down past threads that havent had posts in days to to get back to one that has is just bad design.
No.1597
Not sure if >>1594 is legit spamvertising or just a parody of it but it should probably be deleted simply because it sets a bad precedent.
No.1606
Regarding bump limits:
The limit can only be increased if Hotwheels's attention is brought to it. Either I could make a thread on
>>>/meta/ or someone else.
>>1597Yeah this sort of stuff ain't kosher. Going to add it to the rules page not to blatantly advertise bullshit, no strikes. This guy on the other hand will get exactly one strike because fairness.
No.1624
I did a bit of housecleaning, I hope nobody minds.
No.2232
Board tagging is now available for board owners. Here's how I have them set up currently.
Is this good or should I change them?
No.2233
>>2232You forgot ERP.
Might wanna make it "3d modeling", one L, for reasons of consistency (two L is British English, but chances are any other occurrence of the tag is gonna use the American English version). And I don't think there's much call for "game development"; games on SL are pretty much limited to JasX and gambling bullshit, and I've never seen 4chan design any games on SL. At least, never beyond the typical "hey wouldn't it be cool" stage.
No.2315
No.2378
>>2233Right right. How about this?
No.2533
Stop moderating.
No.2556
>>2533The amount of mad this is generating is hilarious, keep moderating forever.
No.2562
>>2533Unfortunately for you I cannot simply stop moderating. Nearly every choice I have made in running the board has been expressed to the public before going into effect to see if people are in support or to see if anyone would voice objection. I have constantly asked for feedback on how people would like the board to function. If you are one of the unfortunate users that have been in every vote minority then I personally and sincerely apologize to you for failing to cater to your desires for a Second Life imageboard. If you have an issue with how I moderate be it severity, style, flavor, direction or volume please voice your thoughts on how you'd like me to change.
I am not the board's dictator. I'm not even the board's elected president. I am the lackey for everyone who posts here. You all have more control over this board than me. It would be infinitely unfair for me to have complete control over a board and its users on a site whose design philosophy is free speech. Speak up, I'm listening. No.2717
I'd like to call a vote to impeach Toast.
No.2722
>>2717>impeachThat would imply that I'm in a position of authority.
I'm not.
It may seem like I am but other people have more choice over matters than myself.
If you want something changed or done then bring it up and people (not me 99% of the time) can debate or vote whether or not it's worth it. Whatever is decided upon is simply carried out by me.
No.2957
>>2722Who is the authority?
No.2967
>>2957We are. Us and everyone else on the board.
Just let that sink in a little before you whine.
No.3072
>>2722You didn't hold a vote to remove an image, you just did it. You are the authority and that's no fun.
No.3074
>>3072In the case of sensitive information being posted on the board I don't require a vote. I only require a request by anyone involved and even then I have to determine if the style and manner of posting indicates malicious intent. I've only ever removed 3 pictures and 1 chat log only because
people asked.I don't remove anything on a whim. I never have and I never will because that's no fun.
No.3095
>>3074B-b-but T-toast doxxing p-people is f-f-fun.
:((((((((
No.3572
No.3585
>>3572Sorry broski, that meme train left the station a long time ago. Why not try talking about Kanye instead? I understand that's popular with the kids these days.
No.4232
I've been writing up a 2.0 version of the 'rules'. Its going to be way less wordy and way more broad.
No.4233
>>4232Also I really want to bring up the idea of flags again because it sounds cool and fun
No.4241
>>4233But then you'd reveal that all shitposters are Australians.
Also it would be pretty identifying of otherwise-anonymous posts, since we have only a handful of non-American posters, and it would be really easy to identify them from their country, given what most of the group knows about each other. It'd be even worse than implementing per-thread IDs, as far as that goes.
I mean, not that I support making shitposting easier. But, wouldn't want to scare people off. (I was actually in favor of IDs, but since there's clearly that many people concerned with their privacy/anonymity and IDs didn't fly, I think this would be even less well-received as an idea.)
No.4279
>>4241This. I am myself still supportive of IDs, but country flags would be terrible. For some of us it would basically just identify us immediately while leaving all Americans anonymous.
No.4310
>>4241>>4279I meant custom voluntary use flags, not forced country flags.
No.4313
>>4310Oh. What's that? I've only ever seen 8chan boards with mandatory country flags.
No.4342
>>539What sort of hyphens are those anyway
``this`` or
thisI honestly think italics and bold should be triggered by asterisks.
No.4450
>>4313A flag that you choose to show up next to your posts. They're not necessarily indicative of which country you're posting from and you can completely ignore it if you don't want a flag.
No.5190