>cyberix just has to ensure this remains /g/ v2.0
Partially correct. I am fine with topics that aren't explicitly about technology, but there are certain limits as to what I want to see on this site. I've updated our forum guidelines significantly since this thread started to address exactly these concerns.
4chan, specifically /g/, suffers from a fundamental problem: it's been entirely taken over by users uninterested in maintaining the quality standards that made those communities valuable. They're more interested in converting every board into cesspools consisting of flamewars and spam. New users aren't aware of this problem and eventually become part of the hivemind working to destroy it.
Given Cyberix's primary focus is on anonymous posting and technology discussion, We've had to establish clear contribution standards to prevent the same degradation. The updated guidelines now explicitly define what constitutes meaningful discussion versus low-effort posting patterns.
For clarification, there's no "cutting down on free speech" here. We're enforcing contribution standards. Even American free speech has limits. You can't yell fire in a movie theater, and you can't spam shock content in technical discussions.
We've had to deal with users attempting to post illegal content, random one-liners designed to derail threads, and people trying to turn this site into a refuge for content that would compromise its legal standing and longevity.
There's a clear pattern that everyone here needs to take into consideration: users from degraded communities are attempting to recreate the same low-quality environment here. Whether they're from modern social media, soyjak.party, modern 4chan, the pedophilic ban evasion services, or anywhere else on the Internet, their contribution quality is consistently low and easy to spot.
Unfortunately, The solution isn't trying to profile users based on their stylometry or certain word choices. But we can instead enforce standards consistently.
If someone can contribute meaningfully to technical discussion, their site of origin is irrelevant. If they can't, they'll find themselves restricted to lurking regardless of where they came from.
Everyone with moderation access agrees: quality discussion is the priority. The updated guidelines make this explicit, with clear examples of what contributes versus what detracts from threads.
This is what we mean by "A refuge for those seeking solace from the sludge of the lowercase-i internet". Actual standards, consistently applied.
