I'm in a bit of a hurry so I'll try to be curt but thorough.
Ok so, I typically would not post with my capcode or name attached, in fact, I reckon this might be the first, maybe second time at best, but I suppose the situation is starting to degenerate to the point it's warranted.
First, let's clear some air: these >>316526 >>316539 posts aren't mine, my capcode shows up as Global Staff, not Board. I literally posted the thread, went to do some other stuff and then went to bed. I only woke up just now to go to work. Also, I've only gotten back from a year long hiatus due to private matters some 2 weeks ago. So, I don't know what kind of ghost people who claim to have been bickering with me have been visited by. Sturgeon gave me a quick brief on how there are some new people in the staff but from my understanding there's currently only one active local mod on /v/, so I can only assume both capcoded posts were made by him, and the ban also issued by him, to himself? Unless there's some context I'm missing, I don't know, don't ask me. Also I didn't make that poll.
Second, regarding the main topic. I reckon there has been a huge conflict of information on both ends, admittedly miscommunication on my part, and possibly misunderstanding on yours, which has led to this blowing way, way out of proportion. Yes, looking back at the OP I'll concede it could've been clearer and some things that seemed obvious to me wouldn't be to everyone. That's on me. At the same time, most criticism seems to stem either from misunderstandings or from assuming the worst possible doomsday scenarios:
>ZOMG THEY'RE NUKING A ZILLION THREADS FOR THE LULZ
No. Nowhere in the OP does it say that, like at all. I can sorta, kinda see how one could maybe misinterpret but I'm telling you now that's not what's happening. What is really happening is that by adjusting the thread post limit, threads which are past that new limit will get locked automatically. Locked mind you, not exterminatus'd from orbit overnight, and not sucked into a black hole, not a blink and you'll miss it thing. I said they would get pruned "sooner" because that's what happens with threads that, over time, slide to the bottom of the catalog and you know, eventually get pruned, normally? Just that it would happen a bit sooner because all newer threads will have a slightly shorter lifespan. Which brings me to the second point.
>ZOMG THIS IS LITERALLY TURNING TO TWITTER ZOOMER ZOOMER 4CUCK & friends
Which sounds very dramatic and all, but that's kind of all it is, and it almost seems silly having to address it. The change is nowhere near as huge as some make it seem. 100 fewer posts per thread is only 22% less than the current limit. If a thread took months to fill up before, it'll still take months with the new limits, it'll just take a little less, and then you can just make a new one. That's literally it.
It's a small adjustment that reflects the current volume of activity. The previous limits made sense when this place had a higher user and post count, and threads filled up at an acceptable and appropriate pace. But now that there are fewer people it's effectively fighting against activity. As someone already pointed out, threads tend to generate more traction earlier in their life. All this does is push a little in that direction, so I quite honestly don't get all the talk about it being the Antichrist 9000.
>We have to preserve threads FOREVAH
No? This is an imageboard, ephemeral in nature. Threads come and go by design. In some places quicker, some other slower, but it's not some kind of permanent static archival site. If that's what you're looking for I'm afraid you want a fundamentally different experience and you should maybe look into forums with permanent storage or getting into local archiving efforts. I'm sorry but this isn't really up for debate. A thread lasting for 2 years because someone bumps it every few months doesn't necessarily mean quality.
>Won't anyone think of the poor threads we're losing?
If anyone had taken 2 minutes to check the list I posted they'd see the vast majority of those threads are already autosaging, are 2+ years old, and/or have already been replaced by a new iteration. Also, I already explained that feared nuking isn't happening, so they'll stick around until they reach the bottom of the catalog and die of natural causes.
Sturgeon is currently not around to vouch, but know that prior to posting the thread I'd pitched it to him and discussed it at length and had him green light it on two separate occasions. I don't particularly get where the notion
>HE'S DESTROYING THE SITE AND IGNORING US BECAUSE HE'S EVIL
comes from exactly.
I mean yeah, I fucking went to sleep and woke up to a tornado of autism and blatant fuckery. I read the thread, I understand people are resistant to change "for the sake of change" or that some might feel like we're "taking" something from them. That's fine. You can think 350 is a stupid limit. You can think the whole idea is unnecessary. You can disagree with the reasoning. None of that is a problem.
What is a problem is inventing things that aren't happening, attributing posts to people who didn't make them, or otherwise turning a relatively minor discussion into a fucking retarded proxy war. That's not criticism and it doesn't help anyone figure out whether the change is actually a good idea, but I understand the latter is obviously not on everyone's agenda.
I made the suggestion to Sturgeon in good faith because I genuinely believe it'll improve board health in the long run. That doesn't mean it's sacred scripture, and it doesn't mean criticism isn't allowed. It means there was an actual reason for proposing it beyond "staff woke up nasty+gay and decided to fuck with the board."
I already pinged Sturgeon to discuss the topic further and whether to actually implement the change or not. Given the amount of confusion around the implementation, and since some were asking for a longer window to archive stuff, we'll postpone it until next weekend for now. To be clear, postponed does not mean cancelled. It means we're taking another look at it before doing anything, and there is now more time for people to actually read what the change does rather than whatever interpretation has been circulating in this thread. I'm not just going to capitulate because some sperged out loudly.
If you have an actual argument against the change, make it. If you think 350 is too low, explain why. If there's something about the implementation I haven't considered, point it out. That's useful. Conspiracy circus bullshit and endless gay slapfighting isn't.
With that said, the substantive discussion has run its course for now, and with the arrival of the usual suspects this thread is rapidly turning into a shitshow, so I'm gonna lock it temporarily and keep it locked until Sturgeon's back and has had a chance to look through the discussion himself. We can pick this back up then, with an actual decision on whether the change is happening, being modified, or being scrapped.
Having now written this piece of shit monologue I have to go be a good wageslave.