>tags instead of boards
No thank you.

>tags instead of boards
that just means its a registrationless, accountless, text only twitter that has a higher character limit and a subject line.

Sounds like ass.

Do share your work when you're done

I think people are far too quick to condemn things the very moment they notice something has a similarity or pattern that can in any way be associated with something else they don't like.
I've never had a twitter account, but I have always thought there are some things that site does which are actually really good ideas for _large_ sites. I think we have to just face the music and realize that the standard image/textboard format simply doesn't work out for very large populations.
Plus federation is always fucking cool, and if you disagree then get the fuck out of my face.

Is there an actual site you had in mind OP or is this something new you're working on?

federated?

Sounds like Mastodon. Will probably be full of retards as well, if anglo textboards are any indication.

So like Twitter tags. Or Reddit flairs.

>>6
"Good ideas for large sites" is like ways to make a shit sandwich palatable. Big sites are bad to begin with both practically and in principle.
Especially in principle. They're the centralization and control of the internet by a few powerful interests through social engineering and shilling. You wont compete with corporations for large sites, anything you can do in a secure and freedom-respecting way they can copy, centralize, then shill a trillion times harder.

>>10
I disagree. Big _communities_ are bad to begin with. Big _sites_ aren't necessarily bad. And that's the point I think, you can't stop something like 4chan from becoming popular, and the problem is that we still build imageboards like they're supposed to be single coherent communities and that's the reason 4chan is so shit. It's too big to be a single community.
You know that's the reason people just go around fighting their wars on anime or their wars on frogposting or whatever, it's because they cannot stand the idea of being a part of the same community as other people who want to also use 4chan.
If you build an imageboard that doesn't pretend to be a single community from the start you can have a big site with small communities, and in the case of OP's idea they would be connected by their tags.

>They're the centralization and control of the internet by a few powerful interests through social engineering and shilling
Again, that's only because when a site is de facto viewed as a single huge community then people want to control dialog of that community. That doesn't happen if you allow people to form their smaller groups connected by a shared interest.
Having a fixed list of boards is nowhere near as insulated as something like tags would be.

But what's the real complaint about a tag system anyway? Just "because X does it and I don't like X"? What's the evidence that the reason X is shit is because of the tag system?
I don't use reddit but some people have mentioned they have a tag-like system? If so who cares? That site is shit because of karma and gold, not because of tags. Twitter is shit because it's a normalfag big business data farming site that encourages people to use their real names and blog and amass "followers" and other dumb profile points. Not because of tags.

>>10
>>11
Another argument I can make is that 4taba's board system is extremely close to just being a tag system. Literally the only difference is you can't post on multiple boards whereas you could post on multiple tags. Other than that they're essentially identical. I just view tags as a sort of flexible board system. There's no evidence I'm aware of that a tag system has ever been a major cause of a community turning into shit. It's all just anecdotal coincidence.

>federated textboards
>also there's tags instead of boards
Somebody said this on /qa/ already, but that is an apt description of Usenet, which has been around for decades. Only Usenet isn't anonymous normally.

And NNTPchan is doing federated imageboards with a Usenet-based backend: https://2hu-ch.org/
I don't know if they let you crosspost (post to multiple newsgroups), though.

If the Internet should teach you something it's that good ideas don't get you nowhere, money and luck do. Just look at all the platforms that are much better than the most used ones but people still prefer to remain on Discord, Twitter, et cetera out of convenience.

>>11
>that's only because when a site is de facto viewed as a single huge community then people want to control dialog of that community
Thats not what im talking about and ive never even noticed that happen on big sites as much as small sites. Big sites are inherently evil because they centralize administrative power in the hands of the operator of that site, ie the corporation. This keeps happening and people come to think there is no internet outside of twitter, facebook, instagram, etc., and that if something is silenced on these platforms, it may as well not even exist, they can feed almost everyones data to advertisers and governments, etc etc.
and as said before, you cant compete with people whos goal is to make a profit. anything you make with the intention of not being an asshole, they'll buy from you and be assholes, or copy and shill their copy a trillion times harder then be assholes. anything you decentralize, theyll buy and centralize or copy and centralize and shill their copy a trillion times harder.

>>12
But that's the point. The specific reason I dislike tags instead of boards is because I want to only post on one label at a time.

>>3
Twitter is post-oriented while forums are thread-oriented

>>4 >>6
I'll post it when I finish it

>>8
> sounds like Mastodon
but it's not, there's no avatars or incentive to post bullshit about your life or start drama over nothing. It's still an anonymous forum even if it allows people to use tripcodes

>>9
Yes, more like flairs or tags than subreddits

>>11 >>12
Yeah, it'd be more like 8ch in the regard that many smaller communities can co-exist under the same big tent. Hard agree with 4taba essentially having a tag system now, too.

>>16
You can still only post on one label; you could even post on no labels

>>17
Would the boards be gone if we added tags, with the tags just replacing the boards?
Then there would just be /all/, with some option to filter tags?
Would there be official tags and unnoficial tags, like the boards today?

>>8
Mastodon is great though. Stop being an edgy dumbass.

>>19
The dumbshit here is you given you can't read that I'm complaining about western textboards, not Mastodon.

If you think they are bad, you haven't found the good ones. And I'm not sharing their names or you'll ruin it.

>And I'm not sharing their names or you'll ruin it.
I'm not that guy, but this type of thinking is retarded. Especially on a small imageboard.

>>21
>wahh, gotta keep my sekritklubs secret!
If secrecy is the only thing safeguarding their quality, perhaps the users aren't very quality anyway.

>>21
If they're small and got people like you then they must not be really that good.

>>23
I mean, I enjoy a secret club. The secret club atmosphere imporves imageboards. Even 4chan still has a bit of that feeling, like we're all in on a few jokes.
But naming another secret club on a secret club shouldn't be an issue. Just because you disagree with someone on one thing on 4taba doesn't mean he's some shitposter who'd ruin other websites.

>>18
tags replace boards. So there's /all/, and /topic/ or /all/ - /topic/, etc

I guess each board will be able to decide its "feature" tags ???

>What is a mixed board view?
> You can view multiple boards at the same time for your convenience. Just use the plus sign to join them like so:
> >>>/a+ni/
> The first board is considered to be the main one, so if you post a thread it will go there.
> Additionally boards may be subtracted (which is really only useful on the /all/ board) like so:
> >>>/all-ho/

Something to keep in mind is that the concept of federated textboards kind of NEEDS some form of tags, right?
What's the alternative? An entire federation of sites that somehow agrees on which boards to have and which ones to not have? Good fucking luck getting everyone to cooperate on that.

Also what would happen if site 1 has boards A, B, and C, and site 2 only has boards B and C, what would happen to threads on board A?
If the answer is that it just blocks them then that's still essentially a tag system isn't it? It would just mean that Site 2 is filtering out A tags.

So as far as I can tell the only valid question is whould threads be allowed to have multiple "tags" or only 1 tag (which would be more like "boards")?
But I think allowing an infinite space of boards in some way is a basic requirement of making the federation happen.

Aren't there already federated boards, called Usenet?

>>29
federated boards brought to the internet, so you can use them on chrome, for the 21st century

Has someone made a federated BBS/MUSH?

>>30
Didn't Usenet have file sharing capability too? Any thoughts on adding that to this federation?
It doesn't necessarily have to imply imageboard-style uploads, but maybe posts and file sharing could just be 2 separate components?

>>30
Usenet is part of the internet.
>Chrome
Please don't use proprietary software.
>>31
There is a form of federation for MUCKs called NeoNet. It doesn't let you travel between MUCKs, but it lets you look at characters across other MUCKs, and provides remote paging, and a cross-MUCK group chat. I have heard of telnet talkers which are fully federated, though.
>>32
It did, but it's not recommended, and really awful. Usenet wasn't meant for binaries, and I have disdain for people who use it that way. It's a waste of bandwidth for Usenet providers. I don't know, maybe it'd be better for your idea, though.

>>31
>federated BBS
I haven't used BBSes much yet, unfortunately, but:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FidoNet
That's the only cross-BBS stuff I've heard of.

This doesn't really add anything to the board experience so I'm neither against nor for it.

>>35
Prove it.

Prove my anus.

>>30
There are web-to-news gateways. Google Groups plus some smaller ones. You could probably make a better one, though. You need good filtering features.

>>38
Google Groups is awful! It brings people to Usenet who think Usenet is a Google product: I'm not joking, either.

We need a common API for textboards.

>>40
Hang on, this is a really great idea.

Instead of federated textboards if you just had a really standard "textboard/forum API" then you could build a single client that could browse all sites you like simultaneously.

The major difference is that with a federation you build a single network with nodes that filter out stuff they don't like (which I just don't see working out too well since each site is basically the same, just a different set of filters and mods or something), but with just a standard API and a client it would be the opposite, everyone would _add_ the sites they do like which would remain separate from each other.
It would be cool if it also included some code for possible forums too because this is something I've always wanted. Sort of like a single little "control center" where I'd see all posts and threads from the sites I like in one place. The client could even just mix in threads from all the different sites, sort of like an /all/ but only across the sites you manually add to your list.
This would also allow you to add smaller isolated communities to your clients list, whereas with federated boards it'd be harder for small communities to remain isolated. This could be a really cool way to bring back forums and textboards.

This idea just came to me, so there's a chance 10min from now I could realize this is the dumbest post I've ever made, and I should sleep on it a bit.
But if not, then this sounds like a really fun project that I wouldn't mind helping out with.

>>40
>>41
In a way, we already have this. Usenet, again, but lets say you want it to be the web:
RSS, Atom, HTTP POST, HTTP PUT
The standards already exist, it's just that modern browsers are crippleware compared to early ones, featurewise. At the same time people were adding JavaScript, people were removing actual HTTP, HTML, and web features in the name of removing `bloat'. I hate this word now, `bloat', after I've seen what people remove with it as an excuse.
>single little "control center"
Try checking out using feeds in Thunderbird and in Firefox, both. They behave differently, but both support RSS and Atom. Thus, you could pick whichever layout you prefer. For example, I've used it to follow webcomics, and not only that, the comments sections for multiple webcomic pages. It really, truly works.
>dumbest post I've ever made
It isn't, and I'm glad I read your post. I wouldn't have thought of Atom/HTTP-based textboards without you. It's a beautiful idea.

To clarify, in Firefox, feeds are shown as bookmark folders, and then as a simplified webpage when you open it. In Thunderbird, they're shown kinda like emails in your inbox.

>>42
>>43
I don't know, it still seems like something is missing. Even if standards are ready-to-go if they aren't used, or aren't used in a standard way, then it kind of falls short of what I was getting at.

For instance, do any discussion boards use session cookies with their RSS feeds so that you can basically get a feed of all replies to your posts?

Also I was kind of imagining a more uniform experience in general. Isn't one reason people like federations also because you get a single interface to interact with the entire federation? The point is to avoid having to go to each separate community individually every time you want to communicate with them.
So why not do the same thing even without federations and have some kind of uniform interface that allows you to read and post from it? (with just RSS feeds you still have to go to the site to post)

Having a common API sounds fun. The pessimist in me says that there is no way all imageboards could ever follow it though. Perhaps a content scraping server could be created that reformats the content of multiple imageboards into a unified format. It wouldn't be able to post, though.

>>30
>chrome
Anonymous please refrain from being such a pleb

i did officially finish this:

http://0chan.vip/

have fun

I don't get the point of a federated textboard (or imageboard). It's not really a format that benefits from it. They don't have accounts, so migration between them isn't really an issue, and unlike microblogs (twitter, tumblr, mastodon, plemora), where sharing someone else's content is a major factor, seperate boards and threads are relatively exclusive.

>>45
Something like this I suppose?

https://github.com/catamphetamine/captchan

>>46
Chromium is faster than firefox and better supported in a lot of cases, which is why I use ungoogled chromium when possible