I think that it's neccessary to ban the people who shitpost and regularly create new meaningless threads instead of posting in the generals. Their behavior discourages others to create massive informative posts, because they would be quickly burried under the mass of idiotic one-line posts. This is the reason why the imageboards have become so shitty and don't have normal discussions, it's all about who is more autistic and will spout more buzzwords until their opponent gets tired.

I have to agree with >>120 on this matter.
We don't have shitposters yet, but if they arrive, we have to stamp them out before they start thriving. That's why I also supported the "High effort-low effort" categorization of EC gone by.
So far this has been a wonderful board. I don't remember the last time when I've written thousand character long posts 4-5 times in a row.
EC is a wall of text, but I love it. I wouldn't bother typing this much over at 4kanker, Magyarchan or KC, because it's not worth it.
Stop low effort threads, but make sure to strike a balance so we don't just have multiple generals and nothing else.

I don't thing we should enable some complex rules. Community are for shure limited enough so every case may be disscused personally. I know it happened because one USA poster who continue spamming shitty threads but I think all agree that nobody likes what he doing and he may be banned.
Insted of complex rule there may be system of precedent - like this guy was banned for making every day low quality low effort thredas. So from current day all who will ake similar things (not making one meh threda per month, but doing it regulary, like that guy doing). For now it may be enough. Of cource banning spammers/to much agressive political disscutions/pedophile photos and things like that are something by default and like it was done in Laws of King Hammurabi, may not be specefied.

DO have serious discussions and try and contribute to a comfy and enriching atmosphere
DO NOT treat this place as your personal especially political echo chamber or spot to shitpost.

We shouldn't even need rules about that kind of behavior. You all know the exact kind of cheeky cunts who will come here and try to find some arbitrary way to shoehorn in their bullshit so it is technically not a bannable offense while clearly being done entirely in the spirit of shitposting and ruining the board. They aren't exactly discrete about it.

Finding a balance in moderating is essential.

Too tough, no good. You drive users to other boards
Too lenient, also no good. You allow shitposters to takeover. This also drives serious posters away.

Being a mod is not an enviable position to be in for sure.

I'm happy with the current moderation efforts. Maintaining a minimum of effort for posts and threda making.

This isnt to say that one should be banned of a single shit post, the mods by being able to link several posts to an IP are more qualified to know when someone is a garbage poster or if it was the case of someone posting a one liner due to context.

What kind of rules can you come up with to encourage serious discussions?

I'd ban news threads (outside the general) / twitter screencaps / reposts etc entirely. EC shouldn't be the comment section of the internet like other imageboards are.

I just want Ernst to be friendly and to be so rude. If we dont agree on the same topic, it is fine, but there is no need to insult other Ernsts.

Please post links, if you want to state something.

I am fine with some funny stuff in between, like a distrection from the serious discussions here.

But I dont like post "in fefe-style": ohhj look, Trump did xyz, look how stupid he is.

Anyways, a big Dankeschön to the mods(?) for taking care of Ernst and his wishes/needs

My only complaint so far is about the news general thread and the history & sciences general thread. I agree on a news general thread for lesser news, but to me imageboards are mostly about news, and more interesting news should be allowed their own threads. The rule should be about whether the poster thinks his news will create big discussion, thus deserving its own thread, or whether he just wants to share some lesser news for the sake of it.

History & sciences thread too, it's waaay too general, any issue there could become a big thread with walltexts. At least make one separate history thread.

>>128
This. Since this board is slow we can have several themed threads. Only history discussion can create several active threads. News can be divided in several threads too.

Maybe something like a minimum lenght of text in the OP or the thread can't be posted?

Also, if you want serious discussion i would take meassures against "arguments" like calling others shills/cucks/whatever before it even becomes a problem.
Using insults or what is basicially "your argument doesn't count because i say so" in discussions killed the culture of serious discussion in other imageboards.

>>128
History and Science slow enough so most of themes covered, disscutions are ongoning as they should. Separate threda would die pretty fast even on EC most probalby. And in Science and History you can answer to every post on thematic was done from creation of this board.

t.History and Science OP.

>>131
Good thread, thank you for making it.

>>128
>>129

Having a dedicated News thread is good, otherwise the first side becomes spammed with news threads with one or two replies, or none at all given the samll size of the Ernst community, while the long going quality threads will vanish from the front.

I'm open to discuss interesting history and art and architecture etc, related topics outside the art History and Science thread, though.

In general I'm relatively satisfied with EC as it is now.

I'd ban politics at all. Aren't there enough places to spread your views?

I know it's vague but just no low-efforts outside of general threads. I'm fine with somebody just stating how exhausted he is in the today threda or some minor news in the news general.

I'm not interested in fishing but I would say a fishing threda is better than a general hobby threda or some philosophical question can be discussed alone. But even the today threda would be fine as well. Just make the thread nice in the beginning by writing more than: Do you fish, Ernst? or some lazy whats the meaning of life, ernst? opener.
Give details and quality info to stir a discussion that goes behind yes/no/rated

I think we need no rules as long as there is kohl, people rarely come here. Spamming and low effort threads is what bothers me the most. And aggressive (and low effort) buzzword kanker ofc.

I don't see any problem at the moment.

Also frog-posting is not a crime.

Just add Lurk Moar: Ernstchan takes no responsibility for any bannings you incur from ignoring this rule.

Because tbh, nobody really gives a fuck if you aren't being a wanker about it. If you have something to contribute then contribute. The main threads mostly just existed because they were easy to maintain rather than having a dozen threads to follow at any given time. Think of them less as pigeon holes and more as 'posts about X that don't deserve their own thread'.

>>136
Who said it was? Every second picture in the 2017 today threads as apu.

>>134
Problem is that border between history and politics very foggy. Same as disscutions on nationalities, languages, all that things may have some political elements. We are international board, so it is hard to avoid this. I'd batter say ban not all politics, but /pol tier politics.

>>137
Original ECmods chimped out when there was a frog. It was basically just a joke.

>>134
IMO https://ernstchan.xyz/int/thread/9 has a lot of political views and discussion ongoing in it's younger posts. You want that to be banned? No.

You start to confuse political discussion with 'debates' consisting of throwing shit on each other. In such cases, the participants are very stupid and I guess we allready agree on banning such stupid people.

The discussion of politics in unbannable unless ernstchan is to remain a chan related to exclusively non-/int/ posts. I'm alright with banning posters that have discussions that are better placed on twitter or the like, but banning politics overall would be a wrong decision. I would not be able to, for example, discuss modern history.
Please, wont somebody think of the serious discussions?

I think we're still too small and new to be talking about rules. My worry is that such discussion will only restrict this place from ever developing its own distinctive culture and that blanket bans may end up hurting otherwise quality content production or Ernsts being able to socialise off-topic.

...But as I'm a law assburger I will see if I can remember the codified rules I drew up for old EC over the weekend. Or probably before because I have no life.

>>126
>>138

>I'd ban news threads (outside the general)
>I'd batter say ban not all politics, but /pol tier politics.

This is topic policing which shouldn't have a place on a chan until it becomes overwhelming. The problem isn't the discussion of the news (etc.) but the low effort posting that usually accompanies it or in the case of /pol/ exists as its only viable form.

>>139
kohltards spammed frogs all over the frontpage, so of course Ernst got pissed

The posting speed is slightly below comfy levels. Should we advertise? (not on kohl of course)

The only topics allowed should be linguistics, history, philosophy, international folk culture, the arts (including video games), science and technology, and various hobbies such as graphic novels and tabletop games. And the obligatory today thread for blogposts.

Everything else is for nerotypicals.

tbh

>>145
Don't forget dinosaurs

>>144
No, it's simply far too hot for serious posting. Let's talk after the kids go back to school at least.

I wondered whether posts that are about a mundane (or dare I say: idiotic) topic, but elaborated upon and maybe supported with shitty mspaint explanations, count as shitpost and/or are forbidden.

>>144

>Should we advertise?

Where? Big chans will ruin quality, and advertising on small chans isn't fair much because they are as small as we are.

Ban this guy.

Ernstchan Community Rules

Purpose
The overriding purpose of Ernstchan is the maximisation of quality discussion. In all cases of ambiguity these rules shall be interpreted in line with this fundamental purpose.

Part 1
Normal Rules for Posting

1. New Threads and Original Posts
(1) New threads must include an element of discussion and an invitation to participate.
(2) “Discussion” means detailed analysis and an expression of opinion on the relevant topic.
(3) “invitation to participate” means a deliberate opening for other posters to provide commentary.
(4) Where a poster seeks to ask a question they must detail potential solutions or answers of their own to the question.

2. Subsequent Posting
(1) Subsequent posters are expected to engage in discussion however threads may evolve and contain parallel discussion. This is welcome.
(2) The evolution of a thread must not be deliberately directed by a poster through acts including personal attacks or inflammatory content. This is most unwelcome.
(3) Threads must contain discussion between different posters. To this end posters may not make three consecutive posts in a thread.
(4) List making, excessive point-by-point criticism and/or excessive greentext is not conductive for quality discussion. Replies are expected to address the central point and generally be made in a coherent paragraph barring limited points of interest or clarification that require quoting.

Part 2
Special Rules for Threads
3. Interpretation
(1) Defined threads in Part 2 involve special rules that overrule previous rules.
(2) When these rules fall silent the rules from the previous part shall apply.

4. General Threads
(1) General threads are defined as holding a broad subject area with a special focus upon content sharing expressed in the Original Post.
(2) Examples of “broad subject area” include music or general history discussion.
(3) Although content sharing is the special focus it is sometimes expected for posters to include opinion or explanation of the content. This varies based upon subject area with art pieces allowed to ‘speak for themselves’ while more strictly academic content demands interpretation.

5. Customary Threads
(1) Customary threads define those threads where a unique culture exists recognised by moderation.
(2) “Unique culture” is defined by a significant ongoing or annual social aspect between posters centred around a particular theme. Examples include a new year party or hobby.
(3) Customary threads shall be largely exempt from the demands of discussion and instead be a place where posters may socialise freely. Communal rules may however emerge in response to demands unique to the community.

6. Live Event Threads
(1) Posters may at times seek to organise or advertise live events. To this effect a single active thread may be created for the event.
(2) “Live events” is defined as social activities including radio shows, playing games and discussing live content at time of broadcast.
(3) Although thread bumping is expected behaviour it is again not permissible for a single poster make three consecutive posts.

7. Quiz and Questionnaire Threads
(1) Posters may wish to create a thread to perform questionnaires or share quizzes either for academic or entertainment purposes.
(2) In these instances the original poster must provide some discussion of the topic unless it impacts academic results. If such discussion is not provided it is expected for the poster to discuss and share results once sufficient data is collected.
(3) Unless explicitly stated in the original post responses must include some discussion either of the topic, their result or another's score.

What does Ernst think of this rough draft? I've avoided anything too restrictive but made it such that various low-effort posters will find it quite impossible to remain here. It all comes down to active moderation of course but this would be the kind of character I'd like to see.

>>162

>(3) “invitation to participate” means a deliberate opening for other posters to provide commentary.

As opposed to? Locking the threda as soon as it's opened?

>>162
Also what's missing is rules about general musing about specific issues. (Or is that not welcome?)

The "I wear socks 99.99% of the time" threda would be such an example.

>>163
The rule is designed to address manifesto threads and general vomiting out of a stream of conciousness with no discussion.

>>164
I think that kind of talk would go into the today thread which already includes sizeable musings.

He also asked if it was normal

>>165

>socks discussion

I saw this .webm like 10 times or so and that American gets me every time.

>>163
The more I watch it, the more I'm done already at "exceptions".

Shitposting needs to be bannable, BUT it has to be done in such a way that doesn't martyr people, or they will just use it as energy for more shitposting, like what happened to EC earlier this year.

Don't get the mods drawn into public arguments, it also just fuels it. Quietly ban, don't even put a detailed reason or they will again use it as energy and to test the boundaries of the moddery.

>>162

>(4) List making, […]

>whole post basically is a list
>complains about list-posts

ban dis guy. he is trolling us!!einseinself

I am one of the guys who likes to shitpost from time to time. i think it is context dependent and may actually has its place every now and then. i also think we should not be too hard on low effort thredas/posts. imho ec is small enough to judge on case by case bases. some people may need some time to adapt to the culture within ec; don't ban them completely. give 'em time. they may become valuable community members.

also, i thought a general »stupid question«s thread for low effort-ish stuff would be helpful to contain stupid question… but i may have misjudged. only one stupid questions asked outside of mine.

>>124
I don't know exactly where to draw the line either. Too tough you're going to discourage the regulars from maybe making an attempt to be funny or make some levity, and either way newcomers, plain old shitposters will just do so because such is in their nature.

The only real suggestion I can make would be if some /kc/ splinterchan goes down maybe make like 7ch and shut down for a couple of days in order to head them off. It may confuse people that don't check in everyday and would require the mods and admins to be on top of such places at the sake of their own sanity but it would also prevent newcomers from finding the site as easily, good or bad.

There is no easy solution. It seems like every imageboard, subsection or subculture gets overrun eventually.

>>176

>and shut down for a couple of days in order to head them off

Why so rough, though?
It's possible to whitelist certain IP ranges and not let other IP ranges into.
Would it be right? EC had accepted refugees from KC and some of those refugees were happy to acknowledge when EC has stood up again.
It's hard to keep the same quality of discussions, if possible, when number of newcomers exceeds number of original posters, but currently we are not endangered.

>>177
I am KC refugee and I work hard to post long form quality posts.
The board is very good as it is, hopefully we will slowly trickle in more posters.

> new rules

Sadly it won't help. The only thing that would help is some kind of quality control and that is near impossible because shitposters often think their posts are brilliant and their opinion is worth something.

How do you fight a mentally unstable person sitting in his damp apartment posting 24 hours a day? When you arrive at the front-page and all you see is mentally retarded shit you tend to go away even if the posts adhered to the rules.

Even mods have better things to do then monitor threads 24/7 and when they finally take action there is a shitstorm of "people" asking why the retards was banned.