My questions:
>/news/ is a text board
Why? What's the harm in having the ability to post images, especially as replies? I can foresee me wanting to post a reaction image to a news article. Maybe only disable images for the OP?
>When starting a thread you must include the complete URL of a news article from a credible news site
>editorial articles
Define "credible news site" and "editorial articles", because this is open to interpretation for anyone with an agenda.
>Nothing older than 48 hours please
Fair enough, maybe it could be longer like a week or something, but 48 hours seems reasonable.
>Threads older than 48 hours will cease to bump when replied to
I doubt threads older than 48 hours will even exist given how fast I expect this board will go, but fair enough, no complaints.
>Please note that 4chan's global rules are in effect.
Fair enough, no complaints.
>Blatant trolling and racism is not permitted.
Is criticism of immigration or refugee policy racist by default? What about racial humour? I worry about this rule.
Since threads are autosaged after 48 hours, perhaps a higher bump limit should be in effect. Say, 4000 instead of 300/500. Since there's no images, loading time should be a lot faster. Plus, it would be good for all the live happening threads so that the board isn't flooded with them.
>>361711
My question:
What's the point of this thread? Do you really think mods will reply?
>>361722
>Do you really think mods will reply?
No.
I'm really disappointed that there will not be any photojournalism on /news/. That's kind of the point of posting on an imageboard, you'd expect there to be pictures.
That said, at least there is a news board separate from /pol/, I've wished for that for years now.
awful fucking idea all around. hey let's dedicate our meager moderation team towards some arbitrary minutiae ruleset on a text only board (with an imageboard stylesheet for some reason) instead of addressing the glaring flaws in the existing sitewide rules and gaps in the enforcement of said rules
does hiroyuki even know that 4chan already had an actual BBS with a news board that he could just reopen?
>>361711
DELETE /news/ YOU DUMBASS C U C K FAGGOT TUMBLR MODS DONT GET A HUGBOX
If it's text-only, the catalog is going to always look like shit.
>>361732
The point of this board is that it's recent news, don't turn this into an anti-/pol/ thing. /news/ will still hold the exact same views /pol/ holds, it'll just be a little more civil and creative with their racism.
For example, instead of saying "I hate Muslim refugees", I could simply say, "I don't have a problem with Christian or Yazidi refugees as they are good people." instead. The implication that Muslim refugees are bad people.
>>361742
Stop falseflagging, I'm /pol/ and I fully support /news/.
>>361734
>that he could just reopen?
I don't know the technical specifics of what moot did to remove the textboards, but I get the impression that those parts of 4chan were outright deleted or otherwise excised off the site. My point is that I'm not sure the text boards could simply be 'reopened'. I think they might be gone for good without some serious work on the part of the dev. (perhaps that's why the developer/mod working on /news/ right now is still using the imageboard stylesheet.)
>>361747
You're falseflagging, m8.
It's so obvious.
>>361740
dumb dumbposter
>>361744
>don't turn this into an anti-/pol/ thing.
>/news/ will still hold the exact same views /pol/ holds,
You seem to contradict yourself. I wasn't trying to make it about /pol/ or politics in general, I was simply lamenting the fact that /news/ is to be a text board. Photojournalism is legitimate news reporting and it is sad that mods don't seem to recognize or appreciate that.
>>361750
SUCK MY FUCKING DICK YOU RETARDED REDDIT C U C K, YOU ARE THE ONE FLASEFLAGGING.
/news/ WILL BE DESTROYED
>>361758
REPORTING FOR ANNOUNCING REPORTS
ENJOY GETTING V& REDDIT C U C K
>>361756
Not the guy you are responding to, but I don't understand why you are angry and typing in all caps. Can you explain it? Why do you think /news/ is such a threat?
>>361732
I hate having to go to /pol/ when ever a big news story hits. I miss when they'd just let large events fly on any board.
>>361761
OH GEE, I WONDER HOW A REDDIT TIER LINK ONLY SHILLBOT BOARD WOULD EVER BACKFIRE..
>>361711
>Please note that news, news articles, and current events can also be discussed on /pol/; however /news/ is exclusively for recent news articles, and not general discussions of politics, social phenomenon, or world events.
What defines current events?
>>361762
So do I, only because of the flags and IDs though.
I agree with /pol/ most of the time though.
>>361765
>I agree with /pol/ most of the time though.
Making the right look like shit so that liberals have an argument against them?
>>361764
>48 hours
literally read faggot
>>361768
So I can actually post all of that stuff, but it's got to be within 48 hours?
>>361717
The problem with long threads on 4chan isn't the images, it's actually not a problem at all due to cloudflare, the problem is the html file is fucking huge and needs to be regenerated every time a reply is posted, which is pretty intensive on the server. It would be nice if they increased the bump limit to at least 800 for big happenings or made all threads auto-cycle like some stickies do right now.
How are they even going to be able to enforce no trolling or racism. Literally every other post in /pol/, a similar board topic, is just that.
>>361820
Probably just have mods ctrl+f nigger, mudslime, jew etc. They don't have to worry about images as well so makes things slightly easier on them.
>>361869
The words 'nigger', 'jew', and 'mudslime' aren't racist in a lot of contexts though.
>>361873
Didn't say they were, just they will probably do that since that will probably find the majority of it since it filters the posts to look for down. The rest will probably have to come from reports I guess.
>>361875
Racist is just a buzzword for insults directed towards a certain group to be honest, do we really need to give special groups protection against insults? Why should they get special protections? Why not just ban insults all together while we're at it? Racist is a ridiculous word.
>>361881
Well it is the news board not /pol/. It is to keep discussion from derailing into /pol/ shit rather then just protecting groups.
>>361711
>What's the harm in having the ability to post images, especially as replies?
Your frogposting already harms me
>Is criticism of immigration or refugee policy racist by default? What about racial humour? I worry about this rule.
Agreed, guess thats why it reads as "blatant racism" but feels weird reinforcing rule 3 in the sticky.
>>361884
I'm sorry, but banning insults towards special groups is about protecting groups. They should be consistent and ban insults all together.
And what do you even mean by "/pol/ shit/", that's such a silly term. /pol/ is on-topic when discussing news, racial humour is harmless.
>>361889
>Poo in Loo
>Jews did x
>kek posting
>any flag based shitposting
Yea on topic.
Also
>>>/global/rule/3
>You will not post any of the following outside of /b/: Trolls, flames, racism,
>racism
Go complain about that then. Unless you didn't know that existed?
>>361889
What racial humor used to mean on 4chan
>lol niggers love watermelon
>jews are super evil haha
>ay-rabs are trying to take over the world lulz
What racial humor means now on 4chan
>let's fucking kill all those niggers
>it's proven scientifically that all races except my own are subhuman so murdering them is fine
>I'm better than everyone else solely because of my race
>>361896
That rule was just for show, it never really meant anything until recently.
We're turning into Something Awful.
>>361907
>We're turning into Something Awful.
How? /news/ doesn't affect any other board. You can still post your "racial humour" in news threads on /pol/ so what is the problem?
>>361907
Keep /pol/ in /pol/.
Nobody's censoring you and even if they were, you can find another platform on the internet. 4chan wasn't established to be a bastion of free speech. It's just freer than most sites.
>>361909
I don't like /pol/ because of flags and IDs, therefore I will be making /news/ my new home. When it's up and running and I'm going to be just as politically incorrect as I was on /pol/.
>>361911
>Keep /pol/ in /pol/.
That's not a rule anymore.
>>361914
Yet mods delete /pol/ shit(when they are around) outside of it.
>>361912
Go ahead and get banned. Protest the mods like a little SJW freedom fighter and whine when they impose their authority on you.
>>361916
Can't wait for the new wave of complaining threads on /qa/ with people saying they are being censored or some shit.
Can't wait for /news/ to become /shill/
A majority of articles are going to be
>news article copypasted from a different news site, who in turn copypasted from a different site, plus maybe 2 run-on sentences of "content"
>>361915
Only if they're off-topic.
I post /pol/-like threads outside of /pol/ all the time, the key is being on-topic and relevant to the board you're posting on..
Most people like /pol/, you are in a minority.
>>361918
Read the sticky.
They don't allow blogs so that rules out a fair chunk of that shit already.
>>361711
While you're at it, why not make it a rule so you can't directly post news articles URL but instead only archived versions so people don't try to advertise their own websites there?
>>361924
Rather they made it so they had the real URL and an archived link at the same time. You can then see what site it is from without having to click.
>>361924
That's unethical tbqh.
I'm sure people spamming their own sites will get their website link put into the spam filter.
>>361921
>They don't allow blogs
That's still very vague, what defines blog and news article?
You've got shit like https://archive.is/k0bUo where it's two lines of content and the source is regurgitated from up the line, but it could be argued that it's a news source.
>>361929
Did you even read the sticky?
>When starting a thread you must include the complete URL of a news article from a credible news site (for instance, a newspaper, news magazine, or a news TV channel).
>>361896
lel. kid, you're LITERALLY complaining about memes right now.
