New Sticky?
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /fa/ - Fashion
You are currently reading a thread in /fa/ - Fashion
I have seen a couple of threads where users complain about the current situation of /fa/. I'm working on some stuff, but I want to show this sticky I found on infinitychan. I altered it a bit, so I'd like to hear from you what could be changed. I know that some users made threads about improving the sticky, but the archive is down.
STICKY
1) Be constructive. If you're going to criticize or support something, don't type out a single shout. Explain why you don't like the pants of why you like the sweater. Suggest an improvement.
2) Keep "w2c?", "cop or not?" and other simple questions etc. in their respective general threads.
3) Keep shitposting to a minimum. Having fun is fine, but spam and constant shitposting isn't fun for anybody. Even if you're anonymous, you're on a site that's 18+. That means you're responsible for what you type out.
Read or contribute to the sticky: http://tuxbell.com/index.php/Main_Page
http://tuxbell.com/index.php/Introduction
that pretty much goes over the same concepts and expands a bit
toni approves
>>11289881
True, but I think few users open that link. When they open /fa/ in their browser, they should immediately see the rules.
>>11289885
>its only smellz
>>11289901
So when the cross posters finally get banned or their threads get deleted and this place goes back to normal (which happens in cycles, as you already know), why should the regulars have to see the rules every time they get on the site. There's a fair bit of self policing here, and all you can really do to combat shit posters is report rule violations, ignore them, or confront the issue. The sticky has the rules laid out already; what this place needs is more active users and more quality posts
>>11289867
>putting in all this work to a new sticky to have no one read it
>this is a frogposting board don't you know, OP?
>>11289973
>cross posters finally get banned or their threads get deleted.
Are cross posters the only group of people that cause problems?
>why should the regulars have to see the rules every time they get on the site. There's a fair bit of self policing here, and all you can really do to combat shit posters is report rule violations, ignore them, or confront the issue. The sticky has the rules laid out already; what this place needs is more active users and more quality posts.
To regulars the rules would function as a reminder, but they can also skip it as the rules, hopefully, are in their memory. Perhaps the rules would also function as an aid for the self-policing. Whenever a poster breaks a norm, he gets referred to the rules. It's like on /ic/, where users would say 'Loomis'. Again, how many people read the sticky?
>>11290053
honestly I've never seen much of an issue with breaking rules (asking for checks, posting spam, posting memes, clearly participating in a pol raid) from regular posters
it's edgy teens (dead giveaways when they're like three posts in, by the way) or trolls from other boards who try to stir up trouble
I don't know how beneficial it would be to import rules from the Art Critique board (didn't even know there was one until now, to be honest)
everybody should read the sticky when they go on a new board it's just common courtesy
>>11290080
>I've never seen much of an issue with breaking rules from regular posters. It's edgy teens or trolls from other boards who try to stir up trouble.
These groups tend to overlap.
>I don't know how beneficial it would be to import rules from the Art Critique board
It was from infinitychan's own fashion board. I think/hope that rules filter some stuff. When you type in "hair" in the search field, you get 13 results of separate threads. These threads belong in a hair general. I think/hope the rules, I should call them guidelines, improves the behavior of some people here. That's the big problem that comes with anonymity.
Some boards have rules, some not. I don't even know if there's a direct causal relation between rules and quality on 4chan.
>>11290146
There's a pretty firm "don't start threads like this there's already a [insert topic] general" tone in a lot of frivolous threads, directed toward OP. Changing the structure of the board isn't going to improve that issue....self-policing will
>>11290160
It has been said before that the rules are already there. The board wouldn't be changed structurally, but rather 'cosmetically'. Also, I doubt that only 'self-policing' is the 'solution' to the problems this board has. It's a summation of several policies and changes that should do the trick.
rule one talk shit post fit also a new sticky isn't gonna happen friendo bc our mods are incompetent shits who dont care about the borad or fashion anyway lmaao
>>11290736
Why do I need to validate my opinion by posting my face?
Terrible suggestion. Extremely prissy, hotpockety, cucked in its tone and policy. OP just how new are you?
>>11290736
rule 1 is to fucking lurk. rule 2 is to keep attention whoring to /soc/ and rule 3 is keep shit fits to reddit.
>>11291346
>Extremely prissy, hotpocketry, cucked in its tone and policy.
Can you explain why it is? Is it, for example, because of the wording about the 18+ thing?
>Rule 1
It is an unwritten informal rule that is applied to all of 4chan. I can't see on the global rules of the FAQ page. Why would the norm only get 'legal power' (the moderation writes it down) on /fa/? Why not make it a general rule?
>Rule 2
Is attention whoring a problem for the whole board, or does it mostly pertain to WAYWT threads?
>Rule 3
"Shit fits" are not the fault of a website, but the poster; although you can argue about the influence of the environment. Also, why does it have to be reddit?
Why would these three rules be used instead of the ones in the OP?
>>11291406
Ignore everything ever posted by anyone who unironically says "cuck". "Cuck" is the new "hipster", another random word that flabby conservative trailer park dwellers use as a catch-all for everyone who doesn't watch South Park.
>>11291406
>'legal power' (the moderation writes it down)
nigger what the fuck, that's not how stickies work. lurk more
>>11291429
'Legal power' is the wrong word. If they moderation writes down "lurk moar before posting", they acknowledge a social norm and thereby make it a formal rule.
>>11291406
>Can you explain why it is?
As I said, both tone and policy. The tone is coddling and reads like a reddit FAQ trying to protect everyone's feelings. The policy is dumb, "having fun is fine but keep it to a minimum" "don't be mean" etc. This is 4chan, shit talking is normal and a good thing, it means no circlejerking and hugbox shit.
Your proposed sticky would completely alter the character of the board from anything it's ever been, and further towards every other trashy fashion forum. though obviously everyone would ignore it anyway. /fa/ might have as meme taste as anyone else but at least the bantz are strong and we don't take ourselves so seriously and tend to be at least somewhat fresh on the memes. If you don't like that, fuck off.
>>11291435
No, they don't you faggot. They'd be acknowledging a cultural sentiment, which isn't any different than the current sticky and also completely meaningless. Moderators are irrelevant. Stop posting and lurk faggot
>>11291436
>The tone is coddling and reads like a reddit FAQ trying to protect everyone's feelings.
The original sticky was from infinitychan and I don't see why you label this as reddit. The rules, mostly rule 1, do not forbid you to hurt one's feelings. The rule does not forbid you to be 'mean'. It states that you have to explain your opinion.
Can you explain the causal relation between shit talking, circlejerking and hugbox?
Is the change bad? Perhaps it alters the board into a place where there is more talk about fashion.
>If you don't like that, fuck off.
Why do I have to go because of my opinion? There have been threads about 'board improvement', so I'm not the only one. /fa/ isn't a homogeneous group of people.
Not gonna happen.
>>11291601
Do you have that picture with the response of the mods in the IRC channel about the submissions on the feedback page?
>>11291340
not about face, its about ur fit
somebody shittalking ur post is meaningless if it's posted by anon bc they could b dressed like shit
