sorry to spam. but gotta get the word out some how.
¯\(ツ)/¯
>ever notice that the internet is dead
ever notice people like you think and repeat this misconception?
> including this place
slow is not dead. sorry 4-ch isnt as fast paced as your other beloved websites.
besides 4-ch has outlived every single textboard and imageboard advertised here, yours will be no different.
>4-ch isnt as fast paced as your other beloved websites
It's much faster than my beloved websites. But the name... man, I don't get it, why all those 4-ch, 4ct admins have no imagination. They literally call their BBS after 4chan and expect it be anything more than a poor man's 4chan clone without images shaded by the popularity of its namesake? You can hardly find it by its name: https://html.duckduckgo.com/html/?q=4-ch -- probably because it's not its, lol.
>>12
Guess they were all just a bunch of doublewiggers and wanted to be double 2chan/2ch, not to mention 8chan doing the same thing for 4chan, heh. Also most search engines have terrible default querying, gotta use "exact match" and +include modifiers to get 4-ch on top: https://html.duckduckgo.com/html/?q=%2B"4-ch"
doesn't help that in recent years almost all search engines try their best to censor imageboards and related content.
>>12 I think you must be trolling, no one is that dumb 😂
>>1
I'm trying to post but the button isn't working, I'm using latest normal version of Firefox
>>18
first off firefox is garbage and doesn't even render the site the way it's meant to look. it puts padding where there shouldn't be any and it appears to be using one of the fallback fonts instead of the primary verdana font.
all that being said i just tested it with the newest version and the post and captcha buttons all work for me so maybe it's all on your end.
get yourself a webkit browser.
You probably should've tested more before starting to advertise...¯╲(ツ)/¯
I tried it on my Mac on the latest Safari version, and the same thing was happening with the buttons not working. Oh well never mind
>>19
Don't be insecure about it. There's 3 important browser engines and you pretend only one exists. Chromium monopoly must be stopped. It is dangerous to put the future of the web in the hands of an ad company that is planning to kill adblockers ability to block trackers on the network level and only pretend to hide them, and who knows what other ideas they get.
Firefox and Safari are FINE. If you're having issues it's because you don't have that much experience in QA. Try using caniuse.com and follow the W3 specifications, not the latest google experimental feature non-specification.
I also recommend using a "reset" to prevent things like padding and margin being wrong or different in various engines. It's common to use
{margin:0;padding:0;} in the beginning of the spreadsheet to remove all jank, some also add ,::before and ,*::after so probably do that too. Take this as an opportunity to learn how to do it right.
By the way, Safari is webkit which actually has the most jank of all of them. Chromium is blink which is a modified fork of webkit.
buttons work for me on safari (iOS)
buttons work on brave browser.
get captcha button works on FF but captcha refresh button does not.
Looks like a FF problem to me. i tried to debug but FF wasn't showing any errors in the console so... .¯╲(ツ)/¯
Reply open
Uncaught TypeError: target is null
moveReply https://textbunker.net/site.js:70
onclick https://textbunker.net/thread.php?b=tech&t=jzewe3nxxqma9u7wkhzv:12 site.js:70:2
moveReply https://textbunker.net/site.js:70I'll leave you to figure out what is wrong there I don't wanna look at the js file.
Captcha doesn't refresh because caches the php page. You either need different headers or use javascript to add a random query like "captcha.php?"+Date.now()
I don't really care about other textboards, but I like doing QA to check random things on people make like that other thread someone posted few days ago with the exploited tag name.
The guy is kinda aggressive towards certain technologies. Not sure if it helps to get the userbase. But issues of technical nature certainly does not.
I use Firefox as default and I’m a bit tired to fight textbunker captcha and waiting each time I typed it wrong.
Also, I use iOS Safari sometimes, and it appeared I have to change ‘ to ', because it thinks ‘ is not an English character and doesn’t allow posting that.
>>26
OP is just a low tier "It works on my machine" codemonkey. A good programmer doesn't come up with excuses, they find solutions. I hope OP humbles from this experience, becomes less of an asshat and creates better software in the future.
>>25
that function just moves the reply box around. has nothing to do with captcha buttons.
>>26
the non english character bug thingy is fixed now.
>>27
of course. did you think i was some big tech worker sitting in a corporate office somewhere making $100k a year? lol i'm just some dude sitting at home working on this as a hobby in my spare time.
It's not possible for the captcha png image to be cached. it's generated when the javascript function calls it. the function forces the browser to request it from the server and since it's not a static image file it always spits out a new image.
Like i said before, it works on most browsers i have tried. even partially works on FF newest version on windows 11. I don't know what to tell you except get a better browser.
If chrome based browsers don't have any problems fetching that captcha image then FF shouldn't either. If it was a cache issue it would affect ALL browsers.
>that function just moves the reply box around. has nothing to do with captcha buttons.
That function has a bug irrelevant to the captcha.
You don't need to be a tech worker to care about what you are making. The normal response to bug reports is "oh thanks i will try to fix it" and learn from it, but no, you get defensive and insult everyone who wants to help you.
>It's not possible for the captcha png image to be cached. it's generated when the javascript function calls it. the function forces the browser to request it from the server and since it's not a static image file it always spits out a new image.
>If it was a cache issue it would affect ALL browsers.
Wrong. The request is cached in some browsers under some circumstances. You can continue to be a shitty dev who doesn't give a shit all you want, but you are actively choosing not to learn and fix bugs.
Your site also said you care about privacy, but not only is javascript mandatory, by not giving a shit about firefox you also let Tor Browser remain bugged. Words mean nothing, actions speak louder.
MOOOOOMMM CANCEL MY MEETINGS THIS MEAN GUY ON THE INTERNET CALLED ME A SHITTY DEV!!!
ok i added the changes to the JS as you suggested. hopefully that will fix it.
The problem with this site is that it's boring. It doesn't have a cool aesthetic or look good at all. It's dull and boring, needs more flavor.
Will probably do some lurking/reading threads later for the lulz but I agree with the rest of the anons in this thread that right now it feels kinda boring and has that "Will be dead in 6 months" vibe.
Unless you can find an interesting gimmick or a selling point that makes your site worth using over the 5000+ 2chan and strangeworld clones then you shouldnt be making an imageboard honestly.
I think the internet as a whole is starting to have that "Will be dead in 6 months" vibe to it. Even 4chan doesn't have the volume it had just a year ago. The question is, where did everyone go? I don't think everyone is just sitting on discord talking about lame ass video games all day. Honestly it seems like the only places left that have any real volume at all are facebook groups lol.
Stop absorbing thought viruses like an impressionable little baby duckling.
>>36
What on earth do you mean by "volume"? 4chan is more full of crap than it ever was. The real issue is that like 90% of the traffic online is concentrated on a few measly and terrible monetised sites, leading to people constantly backstabbing each other for clout. Thank god little isolated corners like this still exist for smaller scale discussion.
>>36
I concur with #38's comments about how, no, 4chan DOES have "volume", it's just that most of it is full retardposting, outright shills and feds, or just worthless in general. I do agree with your assessment that the internet feels a lot more "dead" and that's because of the general consolidation of internet traffic onto about a dozen or so sites.
In 20 something years we've gone from a lot of websites visited by a few people to a few websites svisited by, basically the entire population of the world. Specific forums and communities catering to niche interests or specific types of people are dead for the most part. Combined that with how impersonal and entirely artificial "Web 3.0" sites are (Don't even get me started on the concepts of "content" and "the algorithm" which are completely antithetical to the very concept of the internet in the first place) it definitely feels a lot more dead. Like you're shouting into the void and getting responses that might as well just be your own echo for how meaningful they are. When they aren't just outright bots to begin with.
Twitter especially is guilty of this and it boggles my mind how such a badly designed website with such an anti-human bent to it has effectively become THE place on the internet for the exchange of ideas. Smartphones were a mistake and the longer this shit goes on I'm getting more and more convinced that they should be outlawed.
>>36
Didn't Disney cut ties with a company for advertising on 4chan? That site is gonna die if Hiroyuki doesn't do something drastic.
>>40
I thought that was the reason behind the split to SFW sub-boards being on 4channel.org and the NSFW ones being on 4chan.org? Regardless, 4chan dying off could (emphasis on could) be a benefit. I don't think board users would manage to live on Twitter or alike, so the community would potentially spawn dozens of smaller sites, more dedicated to specific interests.
In general, I do still think there's hope for a better online landscape. People are VERY gradually splintering off to less concentrated 'services' like Mastodon. I think it shows that some people still have a desire to find their own corners somewhere outside of the whirlwind of modern internet.
I guess whether or not that change will properly manifest remains to be seen.
>so the community would potentially spawn dozens of smaller sites, more dedicated to specific interests
Takes effort to create and maintain a website so these people will just flock to another service like Mastodon as you said.
Besides the main reason why people run a Mastodon service is for more control and strict rules because they don't think Twitter does well on this part.
>>41
It would just cause a mass of marauding /pol/tards infesting other sites and ruining them in the process. As much as we all love to shit on 4chan, it would be a truly sad day if it went down. At this point, the mainstream media seems intent on crushing 4chan and that bad reputation hurts pretty much all text/imageboards. It's all by design. Big tech wants to wipe away internet forums and force everybody to communicate on their ''social'' media ''platforms.''
>>40
They can always rely on donations to keep the site afloat. I just wish Hiroyuki would be more proactive with the site the way Moot was.
>As much as we all love to shit on 4chan, it would be a truly sad day if it went down
I thought about it and I wouldn't actually be bothered at all
>that bad reputation hurts pretty much all text/imageboards
Why?
>As much as we all love to shit on 4chan, it would be a truly sad day if it went down
I would be happy. New smaller medium boards growing. Less centralization. Less retards. There's only positives.
>/pol/ users disappear to mastodon or twitter or that trump thing
>remaining technically adapt users build their own little boards for a few dozen users
I see no downsides here, besides for maybe giving the media the victory they don't deserve.
>that bad reputation hurts pretty much all text/imageboards
Well it's not 4chan alone, but with /pol/ and 8chan being what they are, the media is doing its darndest to paint anonymity as some sort of inherent evil. Probably because their shareholders are hankering for some more of your private data and IDs and whatnot.
Seriously, though. The internet isn't locked down, and if you want to get your own paradise up free of the usual social media trappings, you can probably get a forum or board running by using an old gaming PC and a bit of elbow grease. I had a little chat with a few people inspired by the discussions here, and I'm sure there's a lot of people out there who would appreciate a less shit platform to talk on.
Spamming may suck, but I'll still give props to the few people advertising their weirdo sites here just cuz it's keeping the spirit alive, lol.
>i will disrespect my users by calling them ugly names hahaha
how about growing up before you startin a web-community?
>the media is doing its darndest to paint anonymity as some sort of inherent evil.
Urbit is going to fix the internet, its web3 done right putting the power in the hands of the user again. it's already come a long way and only getting more and more active. it's structure is pseudo anonymous. meaning you have an identity but it's in your best interest to keep it clean because they cost money, thus being a retard is prevented on urbit. there are totally anonymous identities as well (comets) which are free and disposable. but unlike planets (true ids) you have limited functionality and some groups don't allow them to post.
so urbit will have a bit of everything for everyone. this old crusty web 2.0 shit is about to die and i say good riddance. no more domain cartels. no more relying on big corp infrastructure.
god save king moldbug.
>public key infrastructure, built on the Ethereum blockchain ("Azimuth")
You gotta be deluded if you think some crypto scam is going to "fix" the Internet.
>>49
from what i have gleamed by talking to some of the devs the blockchain is no the only way to do pki. it's just the easiest way. PGP for example is PKI and it doesn't use blockchains.
all that being said though ethereum isn't going anywhere anytime soon. unlike dinosaur buttcoin. the green nazi's are already eyeballing PoW so it doesn't have much longer, also PoW is slow as fuck and inefficient.
>no more domain cartels. no more relying on big corp infrastructure.
Instead we'll have private rich asshat cartels that keep causing issues when everything is reliant on something as expensive and inafficient as blockchains? And all that so you can build some next level serverless megastructure to host a new Twitter. Sweet, cool.
You don't have to wait for some sort of digijesus to save the internet by making a new internet with blackjack and hookers, you cna just stop using the godawful platforms we have now, and move to something more homely, that isn't based on an endless feed of garbage being delivered to you.
No on urbit you own your ship (server) so all you have to do is not be a spammer and your sponsor won't drop you. Even if they do drop you you can move your ship to a new sponser. It's not in a star's best interest to censor people because no one will use them anymore and galaxies can also rein them in.
Urbit will also be the end of bots, if a bot is caught botposting it's ship gets blacklisted and the bot operator has to fork out $40 for a new one. Also people burning ships makes the ones not burnt more valuable because of scarcity.
lol
"it's not in a website/company/country/group of people in general's best interest to censor people because no one will use them anymore"
let me know when you've schizoed your way into a delusion that holds broadly true in. the reality is that just like on mastodon, people will set up automated systems to blacklist others en masse because they don't have the right pronouns in their bio or something
>>53
i mean if urbit started doing that no one would use it so. it's in their interest to give people what they want. they are selling it as a muh freedoms platform. so if they backtrack on that it would just be like using mastodon except way more technical and more work to setup.
>>46
the problem isn't getting something up and running. putting some forum software and a linux distro on a spare pc isn't hard at all. the problem is DNS. until their is a way to map domain names to ips without using a crypto scam buttchain or some some other technical crap. 99% of people simply wont ever know it exists. it's either that or you depend on the domain cartels until they decide your site has too much wrongthink on it and pull the plug on your domain.
as crazy as it sounds, tor is the closest thing we have to a dns alternative. but it has the same problem as ips. too long and too hard to remember.
dns is the achelies heel of the internet.
>>55
I mean, sure. For the most part what you'll lose with a preexisting domain registration is money. I kinda don't think most companies care about you setting up a forum where you and like 10 others talk about videogames or whatever. You have to act like a major retard to show up on their radar. Not to say DNS is free of fault, but the other option proposed here is some sort of esoteric blockchain buzzword disaster that just sounds like it'd generate the same issues where a few people hold control of the entire economy and ban people at will. If you want examples, look at the """""metaverse""""" projects like Decentraland.
But, that's also not really my point. My point was that if you want a better internet, you should try to make a better internet. So instead of moaning about the issues you might face, try to just spread the word of whatever the fuck you have by talking to other people, leaving pamphlets ot even spamming forums and Discords and what have you. The IP can act as a hyperlink just about anywhere. You can wait for the next DNS miracle if you want, but I wouldn't trust some cryptobro feverdream to actually deliver something halfway competent and functional. It's much easier to just bite the bullet and deal with bullshit now than continue to wait and let Elon Musk and Gill Bates or whoever consume infants for breakfast.
t. >>46
The fact is that most people want their internet experience to be a hugbox from which they can remove dissenting opinions at will, and the only way to defy this majority and have truly free discourse is to not give anyone the tools to curate what they see and who they interact with (whether purposefully, or just through incompetence.)
This means no decentralized platform can ever guarantee free speech, because someone will come along and add censorship features to it even if the original developers didn't.
>>58
Who cares. The only reason freeze peach and other funny modern politics talking points exist on the internet is because we only have enough open discussion forums online to count on one hand. Getting banned by some overly snobby guy for bullshit reasons doesn't matter if you have thousands of similar places online to choose from. You'll always piss someone off if you actually use your words somewhere.
It's ridiculous how much we as a species have let the tiny bounds of terrible online platforms shape the way we think about each other and our world.