>>12600
>I don't like to get too semantic but x*2 is not x^y
It is still x*2, which is indeed a very noticeable transformation.
>those instances make up only a small portion of content on most, if not all boards
Such could be said, at first, but if you look into boards like /v/, /co/, and /tv/, you'll immediately notice threads that are simply made to rant on about politics, with flaming from the other /pol/ within it. That's something I don't want to see happen to this board, within the near future.
>it doesn't necessarily mean that /pol/ users make up most of the traffic - only that many users from other boards also post on /pol/
Except that means they post on /pol/, and unless they're the ten or so regular people that get banned for saying the wrong thing, they're the types saying the usual stuff, that are just needed to have the slightest talk of anything political to speak out their heart's content.
>'"If someone posted a Nintendo Switch General here they would be told to fuck off."' The same goes for any purely political topic.
That rule would be best followed, if it were made official, rather than simply being an unspoken one.
>neither of those are reasonable
Anyone could make such discussions on any board, with the subject of "x vidya". Fitness vidya, comic/cartoon vidya, political vidya, etc. The same being done with politics leads to a different kind of discussion, which will no doubt lead to a skub fight between the two board's influence.
>there are only a couple remotely political threads here that I can think of, and very few non-political threads that have turned political
You don't start up a fire department when something goes ablaze. You do it to begin with, to prevent it.
>has any other board, especially a niche one like /o/
It's not going to blow up in your face. I'll tell you that, but the subtext is very noticeable, when you go into just about any board that tries to play neutral. Threads going on about degeneracy/classism, with posts within showing bickering between the two groups. At least you can enjoy the extra traffic, if you leave it unchecked.
>no one is stupid enough to come here, post completely off-topic shit, and expect it to go anywhere but the end of the catalog
You seem real sure about that.
>>12603
>the entire point of 8chan was to roll back Eternal Summer and to prevent hotpocketeers from abusing their powers to kill fun
In case you haven't heard of Jim, the new proprietor of this site, that experimental phase has long since been over.
>maybe you're just phrasing things awkwardly, because it seems to want to ban stuff, but also not
Come again?
>creating rules where none are necessary just backs everyone into a corner; setting precedent with action and building a community that has a consensus on what is and isn't acceptable behavior is more important than laying nuanced groundrules early-on
It's hoping those communities can hold themselves together by mere word that leads to disarray. Among the voices calling "faget", there are always more responding with "sekrit club" that just grow in number, and overwhelm. This is why mods exist. The problem isn't the presence of rules, but what they do.
>the solution isn't more rules: it's building the community slowly and not being afraid to let them make mistakes so they can learn from them
That's exactly what happened to /v/, and that place is absolutely impossible to bear, now.
>I've seen ban-happy forums and relaxed forums, and the one thing they all have in common is that the community sets the mood more than the moderators do, and no amount of rules has ever stopped a community from being trash
Of course it isn't the amount of rules, but what they do. Taking care of shitposts and obvious trolls is the first, yet mostly ignored step.
>enjoy it, contribute meaningful non-political posts, and lead by example
Again, trusting a community to hold onto that, when no one has the authority to stop people from disobeying it is fruitless. An anarchic utopia.