Thread 106387583

sizeofcat seems interested to start a new private and invite-only community, though judging by the linked post it won't be an imageboard but an old-school non-bloated forum with old browser compatibility.
http://sizeof.cat/post/new-community/
I'll be on the lookout for invites once this thing started, you think it's a good idea?

Sounds like a good idea to me. Elitism is what makes things good. Get good people in and kick bad people out.

>>106387583 (OP)
Didn't this guy crash out and nuke his website a little while ago?
I wouldn't trust him as an administrator.

>>106387642
I would. Better turned off if you don't know how to end AI scraping.

>>106387583 (OP)
tranny coded color.
avoid.

>>106387904
Using the word 'coded' is tranny behaviour. Consider your post avoided.

>>106387904
Those are not even the tranny colors

>>106387583 (OP)
>sizeofcat seems interested to start a new private and invite-only community,
many already exist out there. are you trying to suggest that this unoriginal faggot is doing something original? or even noteworthy?
>I'll be on the lookout for invites
i wouldn't invite anyone that uses this website
> a good idea?
great idea to have private sites. keeps the trash out.

>>106387628
i'd make it so anyone can sign up but kick out whoever i don't like, especially if it's just a discussion forum. invite only shit tends to devolve into weird autistic circlejerks, like private tracker communities.

>>106387583 (OP)
I think it's a very good idea, invite-only communities filter the noobs. Any idea when will it get launched? This year?

I am in 1 invite only community and I'm quite happy with it

>I’m thinking about having a mandatory e-mail field on sign-up because I might want to contact you for explanations instead of just nuking your account.
no thanks

>>106387642
also this

>>106387583 (OP)
buy an ad

bump

>>106387583 (OP)
>old-school non-bloated forum with old browser compatibility

I'm working on something similar, though I think my CSS might break old browsers. It's a ~2010 style forum with no javascript. Everything is an HTML

element

>>106387583 (OP)
This hurts my eyes

>>106387904
Mindbroken.

>>106387583 (OP)
Good idea.
>>106387904
Fag
>>106390081
Share more info? Looks interesting.
>>106388529
From the article he said that you can use anything as email if you don't care about getting banned on first strike. Not sure what's the problem.

>>106387904
>don't discuss politics
This is always code for
>Don't discuss politics the admin dislikes. If you call out the admins/mods for discussing their politics or disagree with them about anything prepare to be banned for "discussing politics"

>>106391003
>Share more info? Looks interesting.

The design is ripped off of facepunch forums circa ~2010 (which is a ripoff of Something Awful).

>threads are categorized by forum - no "suggested" feed
>threads appear in bump order, not "active" or "hot" filters like reddit
>like ~25 posts per page, 25 pages or so per thread before being locked
>bbcode tags (see pic)
>you can "rate" posts using several ratings (agree, disagree, funny, dumb, informative, etc)
>if you get banned, you can read the forums but you cannot post in them
>you get access to only 1 forum: "The Penal Colony", where you can appeal your ban but you can't reply to others' threads

Ideas I want to do also
>community dedicated game servers
>community event calendar
>"looking for group" forum where you can look for other people to play games with (or whatever other group you want)

a community radio station would be cool too but idk what kind of traffic it would get, plus copyright is a bitch these days

I need to really get the permissions system working just right. I need there to be thread-level permissions so that only certain users can post in particular threads. For example, in the graveyard, you should only be able to reply to your own thread. Mods should be able to sticky threads for announcements that only mods can reply to, etc. The permissions are actually mostly there but the code is a little sloppy right now. It's written in C#/MVC

>>106391276
Maybe, but then again how do you get Americans to mingle with Koreans, Vietnamese, Iraqis, Afghans, Libyans, Ukrainians, Russians, Germans, Israelis, Chinese and the rest?
No politics sounds like the best alternative. That's how you get great minds working for a common purpose.

>>106391276
>don't discuss politics
Followed with stickied posts directing you to sign a petition to allow men into little girls' locker rooms and if you don't sign it you'll be doxxed

>>106391656
And you deduced all that from the OP image, you must be the retarded /pol/er.

>>106391414
Okay, but how do you expect to get any traffic? And what's the point when we really need to be moving discussion to peer to peer networks so governments can't build profiles on their critics and quietly arrest dissenters?

>>106391779
>you must be a retarded /pol/er
Banned for discussing politics!

>>106391585
Those of us that aren't 15 years old remember when we could banter.

>no politics
i will ban you for making my mentally ill friends upset
>no annoying people
i will ban you for saying things most people disagree with
>no baiting
i will ban you for saying things i disagree with

DOA

>>106387904
>don't discuss politics
So are you going to let people discuss websites that have a well known political bent even if the user doesn't directly mention what that is? Can we only talk about the technical aspect but not the community because technical aspects direct the community and the community is the actual experience, and all rules governing it are trying to push the website in a direction towards an ideal the owner likes. And with even the idea of freedom of speech being hotly contested and mostly condemned in the mainstream, are you even going to let people rate websites on their freedom of speech? Are you going to even let people link to (non porn) sites that allow it? Would you even allow links to 4chan?
I'm saying all this because this can be as broad as "if its disputed its banned (and if it's not disputed desputing it is banned)". No politics might feel good, but because everyone has a philosophy, principles, presumptions, delusions, or rules that inform how they vote or at least how they feel about voting, and because increasingly authoritarian governments keep trying to make new rules about things you can do and say, and theres so many more groups competing for representation or control, almost everything brushes up against politics, or has become political.
I hate it but that's the world we live in.

>>106387583 (OP)
>>106390081
>>106391414
I'd be more interested in an onion forum that doesn't have external links nor media
actual discussion place without CP

I wish things like this would just be honest with their rules and put ‘If I, the owner, don’t enjoy your content then I will ban you.’

We all know this is a rule, just put it down for all to see instead of being a coward.

>>106392757
Interesting. It is political cowardice to foist your opinions over an innocuously caged userbase. Your friends aren't allowed to be my friends if we disagree on the terms of friendship.

Ah, I was running a community? Banished without a means to contact any of the friends you made here? HAHAHAHAHA I /WIN/ THE INTERNET! BEHOLD MY POWER AS AN ASSHOLE ADMIN WH—wait why is everyone leaving? People worship authority, none of you are acting rationally!

"Reasonable ban policy, much?" is apparently too difficult for humanity.

>>106391802
>get traffic
idk I show it to people and they sign up?
>peer to peer
if you can recreate a forum experience p2p be my guest