/b/ on this imageboard has long been plagued by a problem. It is supposed to be a "random" board where everything is allowed. On websites like this, it tends to attract posts of reasonable quality, as well as very low quality posts and threads such as dump threads or other kinds of one-liner thread.
I believe that people sometimes need a place to shitpost and make low effort posts. People also want high quality discussions. As such, I propose the segregation of /b/ into an "order" and a "chaos" board, where the "order" board has stricter rules regarding posting quality, and the "chaos" board has none save for the global rules. This kind of arrangement is very similar to that of e.g. sushichan with their /lounge/ and /hell/. The "chaos" board would not be shown in the overboard, therefore, any low quality posts made there would not affect any other users. Once this change is made, /b/ would be deleted and put into read-only mode.
Since this would be a major change, I'd like to ask for any objections. If there are no significant objections by next week, I'll do this. Please discuss. Thanks for your input.
I have been thinking the exact same thing for awhile now. It feels awkward to be in a thread discussing how the JQ plagued my personal youth only to move on to the next "Austrailian man farts in Auschwitz" thread, all on the same board.
Please do this. It'll be much appreciated by me, at least.
I have no objections to how you'd implement it either. Sounds fairly ideal.
>hakase ## Nanochan Administrator
Fuck yourself, namefag.
We have already 5 more-or-less useless boards (/a/, /v/, /ar/, /o/, /k/). We don't need another one.
This might seem strange to you, since you come from 8chan, or whatever hellhole, but the admin/moderators aren't supposed to curate content on imageboards; the users do. If there are shit threads, that's because there are shit users. Stop autosaging and removing from the overboard what you don't like. If you don't like what your users post, this a problem created by yourself for advertising to shit users, like the idiot you are.
What makes imageboards great and different from every other forum is the absolute freedom delivered by anarchy. But, of course, you're free to make a shitty 8chan/modern 4chan/generic small imageboard clone, if you like.
>>3253 Yes hakase i think this is a great idea, i think post quality has become a problem in the latest weeks that needs to be addressed, i think you should do it. Also it would be good if you set up for each board a series of rules that everybody can see(for example displayed under the title in the catalog or before you post), these can also be really simple such as on for example on /g/: 1. Only discuss tecnnology etc. this should be obvious of course but people are retarded. I agree that certain board should be hidden from the overboard, but at this point i think we should also split the overboard in a curated one and a non curated one(that maybe also shows autosaged threads). This is my personal opinion but i think you should also split /pol/ in two boards: a /natsoc/ board with strict rules, and a /pol/ with less strict rules, so all the political spam we see on /b/ now could go in the new /pol/.
>>3256 >but the admin/moderators aren't supposed to curate content on imageboards; the users do.
pfffftttttttthahahah my sides
>>3255 >>3256 none of this lolberg bullshit actually works you know that? any board that claims to have "no rules" quickly becomes filled with porn threads and interracial threads and cuck threads and other sorts of one-liner/dump threads. It turns into a clone of 4chan. Then if anyone does anything about it, all the users leave, since they are the only ones who came to such a shithole in the first place.
Let's assume that Nanochan has good enough users that it doesn't happen (which is not true, there are some pigchanners here). In that case, we would be extremely vulnerable to just ONE person fucking everything up. This is not a situation I'm interested in.
>>3259 No, they will just stay as they are. You'll still be able to view the html file, but the entries will be removed from the database.
I'll try to implement thread relocation as a mod function, since it will be important.
I'm not against. But /b/ should be deleted completely as only few threads are good. People can save the posts they want. New start makes it easier to create more worthwhile and distinctive board culture too.
It's experiment and there's nothing to lose.
>>3257 As for /pol/ on /b/, this is hard to tackle as we have "christians", various /pol/normen and hapa derailing threads there. While their trend is not participating in serious-minded threads, this is not for better. They outright destroy them.
Solution:
As for /pol/ on /pol/, their homeboard, I say I'll fight against /pol/ on their own lawn, but unconstrained by their thought process and their usual rhetoric, using explicitly my own dialectics. When you take them out of their little box, they are toothless.
You can btfo them on their own terms anyway, but it serves no purpose.
And just like they introduced widespread swallowing, I can make, at least some of them, cough it back, shatter it and make them individuals again.
>>3260 >I'll try to implement thread relocation as a mod function
I think it's really important, also why instead of deleting threads we don't have a /trash/ boards where they get moved(and people can't interact with them in any way of course it would be read only), it would increase transparency.
>>3260 >/b/ should be deleted completely
I disagree there is lot of content i would not want to lose, if there are post to be nuked let's do it in the split but the rest shouldn't.
>>3264 >lot of content i would not want to lose
sorry, I didn't explain.
/b/ and all related content would be removed from the database. However, the thread html files would still be up. An example is >>>/b/7 which is the oldest thread I could find. Try posting in it, you can't because it doesn't exist in the database, but the HTML files are still there. After /b/ is deleted that's what's going to happen to every thread.
>>3253 If you want to spam, spam in /test/. It's already excluded from the overboard and has no rules beyond global. The trouble with a shitposting board is that, because it has nothing of value, people only go there to shitpost. But the whole point of shitposting is to have people see your post. So no one will bother shitposting somewhere where it won't be seen.
I think I know what this is though hakase. You want to be able to delete borderline posts from /b/, but it feels wrong to be a nazi mod on a random board. My suggestion is to leave b as it is, and create a higher quality discussion board where shitposting is heavily moderated.
So I'm not the only one that has seen quality drop. Again, I didn't know what to post. Your proposed way is to separate board into quality place and trash bin. It's ignoring and escaping the problem, solving nothing particularly. I want quality discussions and no porn, most will agree as we are all tired of fast, meaningless shit threads contributing nothing to the community like on 4cuck and pigchan. If they want spam then send them to nichan or something. Nano is prodigy and I don't want to let this fuck up.
It's too small for specific boards.
>>3256 >admin/moderators aren't supposed to curate content on imageboards; the users do
It's opposite you lazy nigger. Anarchy turns sites into shitholes. Deleting or autosaging threads hapase doesn't like is irritating but she also removes ads, dumps, one liners and so on.
>>3260 I agree with you but making current /b/ read-only would literally kill many worthwhile threads. Now I might sound like lazy nigger but quality simply comes and goes in such small places, nothing to be done.
>>3261 >New start makes it easier to create more worthwhile and distinctive board culture too
Not when you invest your time in these threads. Even is hapase spam is shit there's still plenty to learn. Arguing lets us learn more and share different opinions.
>It's experiment and there's nothing to lose
It's not good to get emotional with threads but new start might kill this place. We might not be willing to put one more time such energy to build comfy place. Ah, stability...
I don't know. If things stay like that, it will be bad. Drastic change can also be bad.
>>3265 Thanks now i understand better how nano works. I'd like to know more about the rules in the new curated /b/ though.
>>3267 >We might not be willing to put one more time such energy to build comfy place.
People that got here are the kind of people that wants a comfy place to discuss stuff(i'm one of those people and there are others for sure), have some courage, i'd rather risk it than slowly bleeding to death.
I think it's a good idea. Looking at the overboard even now it's flooded with /b/ shit. You unfortunately do need to sit on the overboard with a low traffic site rather than just opening your handful of preferred boards, so in effect the overboard here basically is nanochan until traffic increases site wide (which may not ever happen nor would it be necessarily a good thing if it did).
It would be interesting if there were a way for people to indicate a low effort thread and somehow designate it as such, which will cause it to become a different colour or something. These threads would still have the same treatment as effort threads, but people could filter them if they wanted to. Basically instead of having 2 seperate boards, maybe a parallel system where two boards exist in the same place, and people may filter one or the other. idk just thinking out loud
Good idea.There are many posts which can not fit in any of the other boards but because /b/ is random people have an excuse to post tranny porn and hapase memes.
>>3263 >/b2/
New /b/ on 8chan. It was looking yesterday exactly like
>filled with porn threads and interracial threads and cuck threads and other sorts of one-liner/dump threads
I saw anons mention in other threads about there being time slots where no moderators are active and you can shit up the board all you like. How about addressing the problem that will be there from the very start first if we're going to go the sushichan route?
just get rid of the fucking rules. cancer is proportional to post size. why would you even go on an imageboard if you want to read a long post. one liner OPs are literally not a problem
>>3260 >thread relocation
Finally, the ability to move good political threads from /b/ to under the protection of /pol/ or moving garbage threads to what could essentially be 4chan's /trash/ would be great.
Maybe a database dump could also be done for those looking to archive the good threads of /b/
>>3267 >there's still plenty to learn
No, the hapa retard has been going around in circles for quite some time now
>>3272 >indicate a low effort thread
It's called saging, maybe what you propose / autosaging could be done automatically by calculating the percentage of saged posts out of, say, the 30 most recent posts.
>>3277 As long as the posts get deleted in the end and the various cancer get the idea that they aren't wanted, they leave. It's a lot harder to troll long-term when the admin's against you.
>>3278 This is the kind of person that learns of imageboards through reddit and thinks they're only meant for shitposting
>>3279 one line posts are not a problem. shit threads are a problem. not all one liner posts are a problem
>>3281 >This is the kind of person that learns of imageboards through reddit and thinks they're only meant for shitposting
>t. newfag
maybe you should go to reddit since you want "serious discussions" enforced by moderation
we should seriously discuss on how to call the new boards.
/cosmos/ - /chaos/
/nirvana/ - /samsara/
/heaven/ - /hell/
/nano/ - /desu/
/intellectual/ - /degenerate/
/urinal/ - /shitter/
/aryan/ - /nigger/ also /hapa/ would work(this this for you hapa-spammer, with love <3)
/hakase/ - /hapase/
/biodegradable/ - /radioactive/
/chemo/ - /ebola/
/sanity/ - /insanity/
>>3253 >dump threads
Fuck you, hakase. Dump threads are a tradition as old as English-language /b/ boards. Maybe you should quit the IB game and make yourself a nice subreddit?
>>3287 yeah, the times when netiquette still existed and there weren't hordes of online belligerents.
the best example of this is the retards demanding freedom to shitpost unceasingly while their home boards and sites are extremely censorious. they won't even allow questioning their positions, let alone shitposting about it. it's basically a mirror of the communists demanding free speech in the 60s and calling for censorship now. there can be no good faith amongst deceptive actors.
I have a few objections and proposals, and I hope to keep them structured:
a) splitting imageboard userbase further into small boards MAY become a problem; for now overboard seems to deal with it nicely, but it's not a good strategic decision, mostly because subcommunities WILL become isolated if we get more users
b) /b/ SHOULD NOT be closed, as there is no coherent reason for it and there is no need to rush; just forbidding new threads from being created and autosaging everything on /b/ OR just renaming /b/ to /chaos/ and creating one new board should be fine
c) MAYBE /order/ and /chaos/ are essentially futile, and thus we need something like 2 overboards - quality one and unquality one, keeping the overall board layout more or less same and keeping the princible of the "composition of the board" being enforced; this proposal comes from a fact that shitposting is not limited to random /b/ stuff - every discussion with a topic could be a memeposting and otherwise shit quality (this proposal is incompatible with b))
d) this DOES NOT address a problem of a thread derailment; any quality thread may suffer this fate unless you're willing to babysit everything and punish the baddies, inevitably doing collateral damage in the process
Overall I think the c) proposal together with the thread migration would be the most robust. I understand that I'm coming from the idea that I want to please everyone. The point I want to make is that we CAN and we WANT to please everyone. We're friends.
>>3293 >d) this DOES NOT address a problem of a thread derailment; any quality thread may suffer this fate unless you're willing to babysit everything and punish the baddies, inevitably doing collateral damage in the process
I think this is a very important point. Derailers need to have their posts deleted in order to signal to them that they aren't welcome here. Hell, you could even apply global rule 2 to them. This is all of course assuming hakase does not have a bias towards them in the first place.
Aside from that, I think having a /trash/-like separate overboard where low quality threads that get autosaged (or some separate distinction) show up would be nice.
>>3293 >>3294 >/b/ SHOULD NOT be closed
>renaming /b/ to /chaos/
If you don't close /b/ and get a fresh start nothing will change.
>we need something like 2 overboards
I already pointed out that here >>3257 but you need to understand that we need a way to distinguish between what goes on the curated overboard and the uncurated one, and either you go full cuck and you implement downvotes or you plit /b/ in two boards, and one goes to the curated overboard and the other goes to the uncurated one.
>this DOES NOT address a problem of a thread derailment
I don't think there's a way to fix that beside creating a different board culture on the new curated /b/(this is also why you need a new fresh start).
>The point I want to make is that we CAN and we WANT to please everyone. We're friends.
No that's always gonna be impossible, you need to make sacrifices and get some people angry if you want to make things better.
>>3253 >I propose the segregation of /b/ into an "order" and a "chaos" board, where the "order" board has stricter rules regarding posting quality, and the "chaos" board has none save for the global rules
Good initiative, I have nothing against some Ordo ab Chao
>>3299 >The motif of Chaoskampf (German: [ˈkaːɔsˌkampf], "struggle against chaos") is ubiquitous in myth and legend, depicting a battle of a culture hero deity with a chaos monster, often in the shape of a serpent or dragon.
For weebs:
/susanoo/ - /orochi/
>>3296 The main question here is if the sacrifice is necessary. I don't see any point in "sacrificing" /b/, as keeping it WILL NOT interfere with the main objective.
>we need a way to distinguish between what goes on the curated overboard and the uncurated one
Well, I think about something like what happens now: Hakase just removes something from the overboard if she doesn't want it there. The low quality overboard may be made entirely of low quality threads, or be the final catch-all for everything, including high quality threads.
>I don't think there's a way to fix that beside creating a different board culture on the new curated /b/(this is also why you need a new fresh start).
In a way, the whole issue we're discussing can be RELIABLY treated ONLY through the imageboard culture.
The thing is, imageboards are not an elite club with smart anime cuties sipping tea or whatever, they have always been kinda retarded.
>No that's always gonna be impossible, you need to make sacrifices and get some people angry if you want to make things better.
I was talking about the subject, not some abstract stuff (in the latter case I would be wrong obviously). I am not sure about you.
>>3309 >something like what happens now: Hakase just removes something from the overboard if she doesn't want it there
It's not scalable, there is a 8+ hours gap when she sleeps and usually if i don't make her notice in the report thread half of the time she doesn't even moderate.
>I don't see any point in "sacrificing" /b/
The problem is that if you make /b/ the curated board everyone will keep shitposting and nobody will post in the uncurated board, if you do the opposite everyone will only post on the uncurated one, the whole point of a fresh start is to force people to spread between the two boards based on their posting preferences.
>The thing is, imageboards are not an elite club with smart anime cuties sipping tea or whatever
I don't know what you're talking about, i'm an anime girl and i'm sipping tea right now UwU, it's fine if you want to shitpost in the future you will be able to do it in the uncurated board and if you want more serious discussion you will have the curated one, it's win-win.
>I was talking about the subject, not some abstract stuff
Sorry if i was too abstract, what i meant was that splitting the boards will make some people angry and probably someone will go away but it will also make things better and in the long term attract new people, while if we don't do anything nano will slowly die like many other small imageboards that were not able to properly moderate /b/.
>>3310 >It's not scalable, there is a 8+ hours gap
Well, that's an independent issue, and I want to say there is little to no point in splitting /b/ right now if we don't have the jannies to fuel the ovens with shitposters' bodies, or the automated system for it (for the record I don't want some shitty bot to bully me).
>The problem is that if you make /b/ the curated board everyone will keep shitposting and nobody will post in the uncurated board
Assuming everyone uses overboard, this is hardly an issue, as people are going to see moderated/all threads.
>the whole point of a fresh start is to force people to spread between the two boards based on their posting preferences.
Well, I think people looking for the safe space (from low quality) should find refuge in the new board, and the shitty /b/ should be just left alone.
I mean, it's /order/ who needs a clean slate, not /b/.
>Sorry if i was too abstract, what i meant was that splitting the boards will make some people angry
Well, and I meant that we don't have to make such a drastic change.
>>3311 >I don't want some shitty bot to bully me
Me neither, yeah hapase should get at least another mod.
>Assuming everyone uses overboard, this is hardly an issue, as people are going to see moderated/all threads.
I already stated in the previous posts that we also need to make two separate Overboards if we make the split, or it would be useless of course.
>I mean, it's /order/ who needs a clean slate, not /b/.
You're not wrong, yes it's the curated board that needs a fresh start, this could backfire if everybody posts only on /b/, if we don't delete /b/ i at least propose to rename it so newfags learn that the system is different here.
>>3310 >everyone will only post on the uncurated one
I don't think this is true, high quality posters would be more aware of the health of the imageboard, and would actively participate in the curated board
>>3311 >Assuming everyone uses overboard, this is hardly an issue, as people are going to see moderated/all threads.
Yep, as long as I am informed upfront about the quality I can expect from the posts in a thread (board name), I'd be okay with having their shitposts appear on the overboard.
On the other hand, not giving uncurated /b/ a fresh start might be a bad idea, since there's still good threads in /b/ and people might still be inclined to continue discussion in them
>>3312 >i at least propose to rename it so newfags learn that the system is different here.
Yeah, renaming is fine and most probably desired.
>>3313 >Yep, as long as I am informed upfront about the quality I can expect from the posts in a thread (board name), I'd be okay with having their shitposts appear on the overboard.
They don't have to (appear), it just would be nice to have a shitpost overboard.
>On the other hand, not giving uncurated /b/ a fresh start might be a bad idea, since there's still good threads in /b/ and people might still be inclined to continue discussion in them
With a thread migration feature it would become a non-issue.
That's why I kinda ask not to rush the decision until the migration feature is in place.
>>3253 You're proposing a complex solution to a simple problem. /b/ shows on the overboard and drowns out or slides quality threads from all other boards while most of us have no desire to visit /b/ or see those threads at all.
All you need to do is remove /b/ from showing on the overboard and then simply enforce the no cp/spam rules for it.
>>3320 ...leaving the overboard inactive and boring. Eh.
Like Starfag is saying, this is not the solution. It's a cultural thing. You want good threads? Make good threads, bump good threads. Don't bump the shit ones.
It's really fucking easy, especially with a community this isolated.
>>3321 You're a retard if you think anything posted on /b/ is worth reading. The overboard wouldn't be inactive and boring without it and you are a nigger for thinking that.
>You want good threads? Make good threads, bump good threads. Don't bump the shit ones.
Good threads are rarely if ever made on /b/. One individual can shit up the entire overboard creating and bumping shitty /b/ threads and this has been happening here basically since the beginning. There is not a single thread on that board worthy of being seen by anyone not intentionally browsing there.
>>3322 >hurr /b/ bad
After /pol/ got nuked from the overboard, quality went up.
Now we just need to segregate away all low quality portions of /b/ and the overboard will be improved even more.
>>3323 There is no such thing as high quality portions of /b/, it is by default a high traffic/low quality board while nanochan is a site that promotes high quality/low traffic discussion supposedly. /b/ and nanochan are antithetical to each other, though it wouldn't be a problem if /b/ was off in its own corner. The only reason to have any type of /b/ present on the overboard would be to make it easier for niggers like you to slide quality threads from other boards with nonsense /b/shit.
>>3324 Hence the change from /b/ to /good/ and /bad/ or whatever the names will be. There is always a place for off-topic discussions that don't belong on the other boards, yet aren't complete shit. There is also a place for shitflinging and having fun, but it shouldn't contaminate other boards.
The change has now been done. /l/ is the high quality board, which is displayed on the overboard. A rules thread has been introduced there. All posts of /b/ have been retained.
/t/ is a low quality board, which is not displayed on the overboard.
>>3326 So as far i as understand you renamed /b/ to /l/ and /pol/ to /t/ no new boards was created, no old board was deleted, kind of different from the initial proposal but i guess this could work let's see how it goes. btw thanks for rule 3 we needed it
>>3326 Hapase you are an anti white kike shill. You renamed /pol/ to "The toilet" and removed the pro-NatSoc rules.
Fuck you. I will not be posting on NanoChan again, unless this turns out to be some kind of joke. Even so this sort of moderation behavior is questionable. I smell jewish influence here.
>>3327 regarding the rules of /l/ ... shouldn't those rules also apply to /g/ /a/ /v/ /o/ /k/? they're supposed to be boards about focused discussion. what about making a rules thread also on those boards?
>>3330 You can more or less assume that those are the rules on all the "topic" boards such as /g/ /k/ /a/ etc. I don't want to copypaste the same rules lots of times.
>>3328 Your entire board is pro jew. You actually don't even realize it. It's hilarious. Imageboards are generally ruined because /pol/ goes up and starts up drama which leads to a swarm of undesirables. If the jews are behind everything then they are for a fact using /pol/ as controlled opposition on imageboards to neuter them and bring in swarms of fools who think they will look cool if they are on a "super edgy and dank site"
>renaming /pol/ to /t/
That's some half-assed decision if I ever saw one.
Some of the threads in /t/ belong in /pol/ or at least in /l/.
Please don't just stop there and migrate some threads when you can.
>renaming /b/ to /l/
Nice. TBH I feel it's pretty OK as it is, but I imagine you'd rather migrate than autosage some stuff. But without ACTUAL /t/ it's kinda pointless. Don't just rename /pol/ FFS.
>>3334 >That's some half-assed decision if I ever saw one
You really don't get it do you? Hapase is calling the /pol/ board trash. This is effectively an expulsion of /pol/ as a board, it is destined to get replaced by trash.
Just like what happened on 8chode /pol/. All hapas think alike.
>>3335 /pol/ it's always been trash, there is never actual discussion in it and everything is a kike conspiracy. based hapase
>>3336 The way nano works pages are statically generated, so until someone posts something and the page gets regenerated it won't change(since it's a static html file), i'm mostly talking out of my ass though.
>>3336 Of course there are independent sources for each page. Otherwise, stuff has to get dynamically generated, which is bad for caching and cpu usage. Plus, compression is hard if things are dynamically generated (since more cpu to compress every generation), so you will get bad network performance.
This is how every vichan imageboard does things, and probably every other board which uses static page generation.
>>3336 Ah, I guess it's just an old static file, and the same is true for all old threads and special pages. On MOTD and board change, therefore, it is required to recompile them all… Basically, on any global change. It's like a return to pre-PHP, even pre-SSI time.
>>3340 frames suck, nano is supposed to be simple and unbotnetted, static pages are fine, i think hapase could just regenerate all of them if she wanted, but damn she is lazy, we still love you regardless hapase.
>>3342 i said that they suck not that they are botnet, although they are used a lot by the botnet and the internet would be better without them for sure, what i meant after is that is supposed to be a simple static imageboard, which greatly helps with Tor speed, and if you add stuff it's thiwth time gonna become bloated and botnetted, you know like 4chan did with the years
>>3343 But a couple of frames allow you to have (((Javascript)))-free online chat! No botnet!
On a serious note, imageboards don't become complex for no reason, it's because after a certain number of active users static regeneration exhibits a number of concurrency-killing bottlenecks, the dependencies to regenerate become unwieldy, and the amount of I/O for the main DB and the filesystem (that becomes a database of its own) exceeds the purely dynamic approach with well understood opportunities for partial caching.
>>3344 That's just a warning from the universe itself not to let your imageboard get popular and shitty like 4gog. There is no problem here whatsoever.
>>3346 tfw you need to teach people to shit in the /toilet/ and not to take a dump in the middle of the /lounge/, you would think you learn that when you're a kid
>>3345 True solution to oh so many problems.
> if no one hacks us, there is no need to consider proper security
> if no one spams us, there is no need to consider spam protection
etc.
>>3348 But it's true though. All these fancy spam protection features and automated filters and captcha enabling bots and they haven't done anything because there's no one spamming since last year or something.
Still, nice to have these things in case some faggot gets triggered.
>>3350 If TOR is to be trusted it wouldn't matter if the board was ran by the CIA, FBI unless there is a 0day.
But it does seem to be pandering by (((Hakase))) for the purpose of obtaining a significant userbase.
I'd like to hear the response to >>>/t/2744.
>>3354 You clearly didn't read the whole thread this was done to make post quality better and moderation possible, it does not have anything to do with getting more users, i think hakase realized that it's not possible to have a sane political board, without shitting the entire website, posts on /b/ were constantly derailed by /pol/ users, most politics discussion turns to shit so it's just fitting to go to the /t/oilet
>>3356 >it's not possible to have a sane political board
100%. I really liked the idea of having my own pro nat-soc corner of the internets. Yet, I like a no /pol/ image board better.
The thing /pol/lacks never consider is that just having a good time with like enough minded people is better for your health than constantly discussing the doom and gloom of "clown world."
I just want to have interesting discussions with smart, like minded nanons. Simple shitposting fun too, fun I can't get with normalfags.
I can do more for the white race when my mind is at ease.
>>3359 Yes and with updated system it is still possible to talk about politics or to have a natsoc corner it's not like hapase banned, somebody could make a /natsoc/ general in /l/ and it would be protected by derailing by rule 3 it's even better than on old /pol/
>>3362 Just because it's protected by rule number 3 doesn't mean guys with superior knowledge and spirit won't btfo you. Your problem isn't derailing, your problem is that you can't hold up in debate without resorting to muh jooz, muh reason, muh science.
>>3370 >it's Hakase
It's so obvious, note how the hapa spammer(asukafag) didn't even post once in this thread(even though it's one of the main posters and should care about the split) that's cause she already posted with the capcode and hakase name.
>>3369 Since when hapa shits up quality threads or doesn't respond only to low-iq baits or unironic shitposts exceptions confirm the rule? Also she's only one.
Thread moving will be added sometime before next week. When a thread is moved, its posts will be created on the destination board in order, with post references and the >>xxxx text updated to match the new environment.
>/b/ is splitting and announcement made
>anons post for several days
>hakase announces decision on split
>/pol/ is in the toliet
>/pol/ was never discussed
>everything else is moved to lounge
wtf just happened.
>>3379 nanochan is revealed as one massive epic trolling operation against the /poL/GBT community
now we can be a normal ib without /pol/cucks shitting things up
>>3335 >>3337 >>3334 >trash /pol/ All hapas think alike
What are you expecting?
Hapas are muts and by definition genetical trash. So a board concerned about avoiding genetical trash can't find their approval.
>>3393 >hopefully you don't
Even as a /pol/ak I agree with this sentiment. I think restricting political discussion to a particular ideology is cancerous and goes against the very thing which makes imageboards good, freedom of expression. If /pol/ ever comes back, it should not be so strict, but a place of argument and open warfare, as it always had been in its older iterations. That is the only way anyone will reach the truth, through openminded debate, not echochambers. Hapa did nothing wrong. Besides choosing shit board names. Faggot.
>>3394 >If /pol/ ever comes back, it should not be so strict, but a place of argument and open warfare, as it always had been in its older iterations.
You just described current pigchan/pol/
The /b/ threads were always terrible and should never have been on the overboard. I didn't see /pol/niggers stirring shit up outside of /pol/, not that there was much good discussion there (a few good threads were made). On the whole nanochan is actually pretty bad for the low traffic it gets. It was meant to be high quality and low traffic with no web cancer but it's been full of shitty pig/tech/ niggers and cuteposters from day one and no one routed them out. Enjoy your crap corner while there's anyone still left.
>letting /pol/ think they have a board and moving it to /toilet/ months later
baste hakase
>>3400 plz, tell me what GOOD forum you've ever visited because ive never seen one in my 20 years of browsing. but on every single imageboard there are these complaints of "i do say sir this imageboard does not meet my quality of standards *tips fedora*".
Now for a concrete example, on every single /g/ or /tech/ board there are the same retards who pretend to care about privacy and shit and regurtitate spam about Net Neutrality and other designated "concerns" that Americans are supposed to have, a bunch of retards who think noscript is for disabling JS, and a bunch of non-programmers and the typical idiots who think the UNIX sudo has a purpose and will vehemently defend it. Actual brainlet retards. So where is a /g/ or /tech/ which is of "high quality"? Or do you only specialize in high quality /b/ boards, which isn't even a thing. /b/ is meant for shitposting
>>3400 Hey, cuteposting is not a crime!
Anyway, sorry if I don't commit anything of high enough quality as you see it, though I fail to see some concrete wishes on how you want it. If it was you who created the last thread on /t/, it was pretty low quality. Like, actually awful.
>>3402 >plz, tell me what GOOD forum you've ever visited
6 gorillion this'. I've found that *chaners often struggle to evaluate based on relativity.
Like, wigger, what the fuck do you mean by it being bad if it's better than everything else? How do you spout "this le good, this le bad" and not even have a clue of a real example of would meets your standards for "good"?
Nano /g/ is very good, because no other tech board is any better or even matching.
Including examples is just such a simple concept. How most *chaners fail to draw real comparisons is beyond me.
>>3404 >cuteposting is not a crime!
Damn straight!
Issues with a current state of Nanochan:
a) thread migration still not implemented, which is a shame
b) /t/ is fucking dead as shit because RENAMING POL IS NOT THE WAY TO IT YOU SHITSTAIN MOTHERFUCKER!
>>3447 just accept that nanochan is already dead. there is no way to salvage this shit pile now that /pol/niggers have infected it, not even deleting /pol/ has saved it.
be glad that it happened.
the glory of that first month of nanochan's life will not be forgotten.
RIP in pepperonis
>>3448 >just accept that nanochan is already dead
Nigger, I predicted it to be dead as soon as hakase pulled that stunt. And despite what I thought and said, this place isn't nearly as dead as some of the imageboards I used to visit. Besides that other anon is right, I've never seen a lainfag that isn't a total fag
/b/ on this imageboard has long been plagued by a problem. It is supposed to be a "random" board where everything is allowed. On websites like this, it tends to attract posts of reasonable quality, as well as very low quality posts and threads such as dump threads or other kinds of one-liner thread.
I believe that people sometimes need a place to shitpost and make low effort posts. People also want high quality discussions. As such, I propose the segregation of /b/ into an "order" and a "chaos" board, where the "order" board has stricter rules regarding posting quality, and the "chaos" board has none save for the global rules. This kind of arrangement is very similar to that of e.g. sushichan with their /lounge/ and /hell/. The "chaos" board would not be shown in the overboard, therefore, any low quality posts made there would not affect any other users. Once this change is made, /b/ would be deleted and put into read-only mode.
Since this would be a major change, I'd like to ask for any objections. If there are no significant objections by next week, I'll do this. Please discuss. Thanks for your input.