What if, when you went to create a new thread, you were shown

Of course not. Do you even understand what "shitposting" entails and why people do it? If anything, seeing a good thread at the bottom of the board would only motivate them to shitpost.

HIRO HIRO HURRY I SAW A POST THAT MADE ME WORRY

File: c5be9c256babbb16ea6ba31137115f09.jpg (69KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1000x750px

Threads reach the end because interest has been existed or the catalog is being spammed.
The idea doesn't work because exhausted threads will keep getting pushed up to the top reducing the lifecycle of newly created threads.

>>1573528
>the thread would already be replaced by the time you finish the post
That's not the point: whether you kill that thread or a different one by posting 10 seconds later, the point is that you're shoving a thread off the end of page 10.

>I also feel that shitposters would exploit this more often for the sake of killing threads
I don't see how you could exploit this. You can achieve the same thing just by refreshing page 10/the bottom of the catalog.

>>1573531
>Do you even understand what "shitposting" entails and why people do it?
Out of a genuine contempt for this website and all that it stands for? I rather doubt that.

>>1573526
No.

I can't imagine what that would be like on fast boards.

Also, It's an impossible idea to implement.

>>1573539
>Threads reach the end because interest has been existed or the catalog is being spammed.
Threads often reach the end because there's less interest in them than in all the repetitive, boring shitposts that get created. A thread that attracts less attention can still be a quality thread, though.

>exhausted threads will keep getting pushed up to the top
The idea isn't that you see that thread on page 10 and decide to post to it instead of making a new one-- odds are pretty good it will have been pushed off page 10 by another poster in the meantime-- just that it makes you think twice about whether what your posting is worth that thread's demise.

>>1573546
Impossible how? What exactly are you envisioning? Because I was thinking something like showing the OP post in a frame right above the Post button in the form.

>>1573550
I've been here long enough to know the problems this site faces have no easy remedies, but I also know that what improvements its seen have come from brainstorming and experimentation.

>>1573526
It wouldn't stop people from making threads. If anything, a few retards would go out of their way to use it to help them push good threads off of the board with bad threads.

>>1573540
>Out of a genuine contempt for this website and all that it stands for? I rather doubt that.
That may or may not be the case. The key point is that shitposting is _intentionally_ contributing low-quality/rule-breaking/generally, well, shitty posts. They know what they're doing, and the thought that they may be hindering constructive discussion sure as hell won't stop them.

>>1573566
>the thought that they may be hindering constructive discussion sure as hell won't stop them
I think that thought is far from their mind when they go to post a new thread. Rather I think their only thought is, "oh man I can't wait to see all the attention this is going to get." If you can make them think about the fact that the board is a closed system with a fixed number of posts for even a split-second, that just might be a psychological deterrent.

>>1573577
Yeah, I get what you're saying, I just think it's an excessively optimistic outlook. The mindset of the average newfag who discovers 4chan from reddit, youtube, social media and similar sites is that the whole point of 4chan is "memes", "shitposting", "banter" - they are too new to remember the time when /b/ was just a single board, and not the entire site. They also have an extremely warped idea of "trolling", according to which simply getting a reaction means you've won. That's why you see people pretending to be from reddit (is it really pretending if they know so much about reddit?) and trying to pass it off as trolling.

>>1573577
That wouldn't work with how most people use the internet these days. They're so selfish and short sighted that they wouldn't care

>>1573585
All the more reason to give them a reminder. They're coming from sites where the concept of a closed system doesn't exist: YouTube comments and Reddit posts don't ever disappear because someone makes a new one. It's a subtle difference that's easy to miss, but a very important one. Anything we can do to make newcomers appreciate that difference, or at least be aware of it, is a step in the right direction.

>>1573589
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity, as the saying goes. And stupidity can be educated.

>>1573605
Selfishness and shortsightedness are not always malicious. They are often traits that stupid people have, and stupid people can't be educated unless they want to be. I don't have much faith in them learning anything quickly enough to change the tide of new stupid people washing into 4chan.

>>1573601
Problem is, the average newfag is not a blank slate. Their perception has been shaped by r/4chan screencaps, news sites, 4chan memes that go mainstream, among other factors. How do you convince these people that there's more to 4chan than epic memes, especially when they're the majority in boards like /v/, /b/ or /tv/? A simple feature like this is just not enough. You'd need a deliberate effort from both the moderation and the "integrated" portion of the userbase, at the very least, and I don't see that happening anytime soon.

>>1573625
>I don't have much faith in them learning anything quickly enough to change the tide of new stupid people washing into 4chan.
So you'd rather not try and just complain?

>>1573626
>the average newfag is not a blank slate
Neither were you or I. We came with ideas from forums, from IRC, from other modes of internet discourse.

>You'd need a deliberate effort from both the moderation and the "integrated" portion of the userbase, at the very least, and I don't see that happening anytime soon.
Spontaneously, all its own? No, certainly not. That's why we, the integrated portion of the userbase, need to come up with ways to facilitate that. A feature like the one I've proposed is just one prong of the attack, one tool in the box. I don't purport to hand you a solution to the newfag problem on a platter, but I do invite you to step up and formulate a strategy.

>>1573658
>So you'd rather not try and just complain?
I'd rather mods just started banning people posting retarded things and making it more difficult to evade bans. If they had to climb a wall to get in and stay in, then they'd be less likely to post bottom of the barrel trash.

>>1573670
Moderation is costly. There is only so much of it to go around: so many people working so many hours, mostly for free. It's easy to say the mods/janitors should take care of something or to blame them when the site isn't to your liking, but there's only so much they can do. So the question, then, is what can you do?

>>1573658
Fair enough. I called you optimistic earlier, but perhaps it is I who am too pessimistic. Sadly, I'm unable to offer any solutions.

>>1573684
That's why Hiro needs to stop relying so much on the same handful of dudes from years back. More mods and janitors, and ones who will do it for free because they actually care about the quality of the website in the eyes of the people who really care about what they're talking about. The trick to finding good moderation for 4chan is to not people who have a "4chan" approach to moderation, but a more "Bullshit needs to go." and "Stop disrespecting the fundamentals of a topic." approach. It's not even about super strict moderation that kills anyone not staying on-topic 100% of the time, it's about making the website legitimately fun for people who like topics. As soon as someone disrespects the things I like, I report them not because they went a bit off-topic because they're having a good time, but because they posted something that damages the integrity of something I like. I'm afraid the mods/janitors are either not around, or they take a 4chan approach to moderation too often because they became too much like the people they were supposed to protect 4chan from.

^mods ban him ffs

for lurkers unaware a bot is bumping this thread and deleting its replies

>>1575262
At first I was wondering why you would want me banned for making a pretty high quality post. The bot does need to get lost, as do the weeb spammers. Are they the same person?

>>1575662
pretty much every animeposter here defends his use of the bot so I'm guessing they're in a discord of 4-5 people

>>1575667
That's a very believable opinion. A board with low moderation is easy to abuse.

>>1575262
Sure enough, desuarchive confirms this. Why would anyone, other than OP (which I am), keep this thread bumped?

^mods the bot is right here, he just deleted his reply!