To continue of what I had stated initially

To continue of what I had stated initially.
>Consider Sup Forums to be one of the last bastions of what it means to have 'free speech' on the internet
>Be a PHP coder and want to make it available for everyone to write whatever they want anonymously on a site I made from scratch.
>Build website
>Try to plug it on a bunch of platforms. People take it very negatively.
>Still trying to get people to write.

Thanks to you guys I have been motivated to do and have done:
>Changes to the rules to be more inclusive of what can and cannot be written. More freedoms overall.
>SSL certificate installed.
>Can be completely anonymous.
>Changed up the algorithm to make the site seem more dynamic or more active than it really is to build a community.

I could use more advice. More things to make my site even better. I am aware I need to revamp some of the design but I am not sure how I will go about that... I will figure something out. Some have been telling me the website looks too 'clean' and too 'clickbaity'. I am not sure what I can do to make that better... but with time I can figure out.

Pic related this is the current analytics. I am pleasantly surprised to be honest.

In an age where social networking and sites ask for invasive information like phone numbers, full name, birthday, etc I want to be against that bullshit. Let the people stay private!

1stamender.com

Other urls found in this thread:

stallman.org/archives/2003-may-aug.
fontsquirrel.com/fonts/bebas-neue
1stamender.com/article.php?articlenumber=988
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Little confused by the rules of what can and can't be posted

>You cannot post content that advocates a victim-based crime. (e.g. child pornography, murder, theft. However reporting on these subjects is okay. You just cannot condone crimes with a victim.)

So what if, for example, a user simply says child pornography should be 'legal' and we should petition our legislatures to make it legal (similar to what richard stallman has said in the past) source: stallman.org/archives/2003-may-aug.

Would that post be banned from your website? I don't agree with it, and personally think it /should/ be banned, but the rules aren't really clear.

Furthermore, you have a rule against 'Call to action of harming people,' but it isn't clear if it has to be directly saying 'harm them' or indirectly leading you to it.

For example, if i dox'd someone, but said "well here's all of his info, do what you wish with it" that doesn't necessarily mean "HARM THEM" even though that's likely my intent. Would that content be banned as well?

Too add on to this, what about hate speech or other forms of racism?

Many people write shit all the time about "creating a natsoc for the white race" and other dumb shit like that. Couldn't this be interpreted as a call to harming people? Again, not really clear

I just removed that rule. My fault I must have left it in there. While I am not the biggest fan of someone who wishes to justify pedophilia or some offensive sexual content... It is the primary reason why someone would need a site like what I give. No site will give a soapbox to a pedophile. I don't like the pedophile's speech but heck, lets allow them to speak at least as speech cannot really cause any harm unless the act itself.

Doxxing. I thought about this in the car on the way to work. I think it has the intent to physically harm someone directly... and I don't know many people who would think that their freedom of speech 'should' be covered for doxxing. But what do you think? should I include a rule for 'no doxxing'?

>what about hate speech or other forms of racism?
You can be hateful. But the difference is a call to action. You can say something along the lines of: "I don't like x race because this this and that."

versus:

"I don't like x race because of this this and that and we should attack anybody who is like this."

Or what about when other people speak about genociding white race?

Like the director of Australia's Halal Certification just did yesterday.

Is it hate speech or just C O U R A G E?

I don't know. I am indifferent. I think it depends on the situation and there is no black/white way to define it. What do you think?

The font is pretty horrific, I'm pretty sure that's what makes the site look like a collection of adds instead of a forum.

I like what you're trying to do but I don't think you've properly examined the idea: you want to promote free speech but what you have written is a free blog/news site where a few people will opine about a topic and the masses(lazy people/people who can't write well/are scared to) will sit and read without engaging with the subject matter(comment sections are never enough). We have technology that connects us now, we don't need a select few to form our collective opinion anymore.

Rating articles by stars is a little primitive and has been proven time and time again to fall flat on its face as well it is prone to manipulation.

Using a name like 1stAmender sounds like you're trying to sell an idea because a bunch of people hundreds of years ago thought it was a good one, you want to sell the idea of free speech on its own merits as they are apparent to us now; otherwise what does that say about free speech?

All in all a noble effort and a great start - but think about what it is you are trying to achieve and design your systems/algorithm/interface to be convergent towards those ideals, make it so that users naturally will behave without prodding or poking or heavy handed manipulation.

It's people like you who make the difference, I wish you luck in all your endeavours.

>should I include a rule for 'no doxxing'?

There should absolutely be a no doxxing rule. I think there's to high of a risk of someone getting actually harmed and you getting legitimately sued

I also believe people who either talk about a '[insert race here] nation' or 'genocide of [insert race here]' should be banned.

>Be a PHP coder
user...just stop.
Please switch to something better like C#.
I was doing PHP a while ago...if you ever switch to C# you'll wonder why the fuck you ever wasted your life on PHP.

You are not the first to say this. At the same time I need to spend some time messing with the fonts to make it just right. what do you think of the bebas neue font bold instead?

fontsquirrel.com/fonts/bebas-neue

is that a good font for an article title? What font would you suggest?

And thank you. I am aware there are a lot of people who wouldn't fit in being able to write. At the same time I am kind of banking on the hope that websites like twitter/facebook/etc will regulate what people say to an extreme eventually. It will continue to be more and more invasive till people realize too much is too much. It is only then the average population will consider my site valuable.

And thanks for the commendation man I really appreciate it!

I think it's a disgusting double standard.

Couple double standards "white" people face everyday:

1. Being called "white" even tho your are the native person of the land (wouldn't happen to brown person in his/her native land).
2. When a brown person attacks a group of Native-European people, it's a "terrorist attack" but when a person of European origin attacks it's a hate crime (media doesn't use word hate crime to describe attacks towards people with white skin color).
3. Not being called ethnic. Have you ever heard that word "ethnic" has been used to describe a "white" person? Even tho Europe is full of native ethnic Europeans.

A person with brown skin gets away with pretty much everything. They can publicly announce that they hate people with certain skin colors and no one bats a eye. And that's disgusting racism and double standard.

What if there was a legit genocide occuring? Either way having a few moderate the masses is tantamount to censorship.

>. I am aware I need to revamp some of the design but I am not sure how I will go about that...

No shit
The font/all caps combo you used on the top of the page (e.g. "WRITE WHATEVER YOU WANT") is horrible to look at

>>Changes to the rules to be more inclusive of what can and cannot be written. More freedoms overall.

That's great. Now it actually seems to be advocating free speech. You are on the level of the USA atm: can write anything you want, but can't call for violence/post child pornography.

I think this part is unnecessary:
>An article ABOUT child pornography, murder, harming of people, physical harm of people.
Just make it, on the DONT list:
"Child Pornography, that is, the posting of images portraying children in an erotic or pornographic manner".
And you need to decide , at this point:
- are child models considered CP? (dunno)
- are drawings considered CP? (not in the USA)


>Hateful speech.
Just say "Any speech."

Your point is to invite anyone to write, right? So you want to be as impartial as possible. Calling something hateful speech you are already
a) making liberals not wanting to associate with your website
b) labeling some speech as hateful, already alienating the people that want to write about it positively.

>No doxxing rule.
Done. I added it.

>Insert race here genocide
I don't think you are wrong there as it is not something generally covered. But like I said it depends. I want to have as much free speech as possible while causing as little harm as I can. So I have to strike a balance at somepoint at how much freedom should be valued. With time I will quantify it a bit better.

Hell yeah man I think that is something that should be posted and talked about seriously. This is why I created this platform.

If a genocide is occurring people should talk about it. As far as a denial to talk about it there would need to be some pretty specific and aweful situations why something like that would need to be silenced.

>Any speech
good point! I changed it to say 'any speech'. Refresh the page.

me again, continuing

>>Can be completely anonymous.

I went to as far as the actual register page. How exactly can you be completely anonymous? To the people reading it or to you?

If it's to the people reading it and to you, include a link next to register that says "post anonymously." It goes to a similar page with what you can and cannot post (maybe even locally saved on cookies so it doesn't show all the time) then skips the registration step.

user I appreciate what you're doing.

I am a little drunk right now, which is the intelligence level you should design websites for. I want articles now, not four clicks after finding your site. Maybe have like some top articles out in front, not behind the categories? Preferably exempt from the pop-up too.

So if you look at the registration you basically see there is nothing asking for any PII. This is both so I can't do anything with the information & nobody can see who you are. Even though you register... There is nothing tying your identity to that account. As far as including non-registration... the issue is I've noticed a lot of bots crawling my site and blasting spam code. I've put in a few scripts here and there to deter most of them and thankfully been pretty successful. For me to allow anyone to write would be to make a ton of random spam articles.

But what do you think?

Drawings not considered cp.
>Child models
are they dressed?

There is a popup exempt. Just register and that goes away.

I do have articles on the front page but it is only 4 articles.

I can probably design a script to just blast a bunch of random articles that isn't too heavy to run. I wanted the homepage to load fast so that meant as little scripts running as possible.

there is technically already porn.

1stamender.com/article.php?articlenumber=988

>It is your responsibility to report "victim-based" crime. (A person using drugs is a non-victim based crime.

Not sure about the legal definition, but there's definitely a victim, the person itself. If you are going to call that victim-less, then any self-harm is also victim-less, correct?

> For me to allow anyone to write would be to make a ton of random spam articles.
Although unpopular with a lot of Sup Forums, I like captcha. I was here when the mass bot spam happened, before moot implemented captcha, and the bliss afterwards.

Consider saying that, then. To canadians, drawings are CP, so there will be reports of CP for drawings, for example.

>are they dressed?
define dressed. I'm not personally keen on child models/CP, but I've seen people posting them. Some are just wearing lingerie. I would ban child models as a whole to avoid nitpicking.

also
consider requiring people to mark NSFW as such (and blocking the image from the front page, can only view if you enter the article) . Otherwise you'll have articles like "Why should our babies be fed with natural formula" next to a 15inch cock being sucked.

>define dressed. I'm not personally keen on child models/CP, but I've seen people posting them. Some are just wearing lingerie. I would ban child models as a whole to avoid nitpicking.

Actually, I take it back. a blanket ban wouldn't be in the spirit of the website/the name.

I would actually take a look at the legality aspect in the US, since that's the freest country, speech-wise. That should be your baseline.

Self harm is victimless 'in my opinion'. But if you feel like you have a better thought, you let me know I will be glad to hear about it.

>Captcha
It made sense at the time to make an account associated that could manage its own articles... add, edit, delete. And in order to do that I needed people to register. But by design I wanted to take 'no' information for mining purposes and only to help the minimum functionality of the site.

> I would ban child models as a whole to avoid nitpicking.

Okay... so what if I put in the rule(and given this is just a random shot attempt at wording it. I am not the greatest wordsmith): "No images that could be construed as blatant child pornography."

>Otherwise you'll have articles like "Why should our babies be fed with natural formula" next to a 15 inch cock being sucked
This is what I find interesting! I personally would enjoy to have a mix-mash of content... if someone wanted to post nsfw that would be okay. I want to avoid however just blatant pornography and hopefully create some sort of congruence for thought and speech.

>This is what I find interesting!
Yeah, I do too. I would just put a cover on it. It's not about hurting the feelings of people, but about being able to access it anywhere. The clue is in the name, NOT Safe for WORK.

>Okay... so what if I put in the rule(and given this is just a random shot attempt at wording it. I am not the greatest wordsmith): "No images that could be construed as blatant child pornography."

Too broad, I think. See what I said >Self harm is victimless 'in my opinion'. But if you feel like you have a better thought, you let me know I will be glad to hear about it.

I don't have an informed opinion on it. I just think that if you have to be consistent - if self harm is victimless, no form of it should be banned (suicide, cutting, drugs, etc).

Can't you make it so that all Captchas are masked? So it would seem that your website is requesting a captcha, not a specific user. Not a dev, dunno if it's a dumb idea.

this is what I found as the definition:
>child pornography as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (persons less than 18 years old). Images of child pornography are also referred to as child sexual abuse images.


> if self harm is victimless, no form of it should be banned (suicide, cutting, drugs, etc).
Yes all of those would be included and I do include those already. The point is that you are voluntarily making that decision out of your volition.

>all Captchas are masked
I'll be honest I don't know what that means.

not bad user, might contribute in the future, on break at work though so i don't have time to take a serious look right now.

Thanks user! Honestly I want a huge melting pot of people. I want to see a staunch maoist agenda socialist talking to an anarcho capitalist to share ideas... find middle ground! It is speech like that which changes how everyone thinks.

what do you guys think of the bebas neue font. It is very similar but not so tight on the lettering.

Bump

Comment spam seems to be an issue. Captcha would be annoying though it would prevent it

Interesting site, OP. I don't particularly like the layout but keep working on it.

I have to work on it to make it better. it will take some time for me to figure out what would work... I just mostly had a concept of functionality for the most part.

bump

>going for a less popular Sup Forums
after advertising it here though, it's destined for failure.
probably already has poojeets shilling shit

Just out of curiosity... why do you think it is destined for failure just because it's been shown on Sup Forums?

precisely.
too many shills
will ruin it like they have this poor place.
you won't end up with genuine discussion, just raids from psy operatives and advertisements from shillfags

>no calls to action allowed
>no doxing
>registration

legit those were suggestions given to me by Sup Forums!

>registration required
No offense but into the trash it goes

>listening to the retards on Sup Forums
what a fucking moron, how have you not "made crystals" and died yet?

This is the whiniest shit I have ever read. You're angry that people call white people white people, and that when brown people kill people it's called a "terrorist attack?"

This is the most inconsequential shit I have ever seen someone get mad about. I literally started believing in White Privilege after your post. Your post made me dye my hair and believe that home invaders dindu nuffin. I am selling my home and going to live in an anarchist commune to become a pangender furry-fluid demogoblin because of your post.