>>7>becoming more like 4chan
>keeping everything orderly
Pick one.
But speaking from my own point of view, I'd rather keep this site from becoming like it, as there's a reason I use both separately. Different audiences, different speeds, different discussions, ext.
Although it's hard to tell if the filtering system would work here, honestly. All a filtering system does in essence is ignore threads (or users) for you, instead of one doing it themselves. While more patient people would be able to use this, others wouldn't. (And it's often the impatient people who are the ones doing the complaining)
Just because it's hidden wouldn't mean people would stop griping about it, though. For an example, simply look on >>>/q/ and see the threads complaining about shitposters/ tripfags/ namefags or specific threads on other boards (that OP is saying is the thing killing >>>/INSERT BOARD HERE/), to which they could have easily used the filtering system already in place there to solve/ ignore in the first place.
I agree that it would be helpful to the people who would actually use it, but I doubt it'd be long before more threads are made over the same topics as being discussed now, the only difference would be that instead of people saying "This doesn't belong on Main" or something of the like, they could say "use the filter." Point being that the same threads would be made.
Not to mention a filter is easily bypassed. Any user one filters would simply use a proxy, or change their IP by other means. Same goes for name, tripcode, ext. Even if the filter extended to include threads themselves, it would be difficult to filter them, since at any given day there are a handful of misplaced/ irrelevant threads, with usually little to no common words to filter that wouldn't also filter the same word in a relevant context. (i.e. complaining about the chatroom on Main v. someone telling another to come chat with them in the chatroom on the Random thought thread)
Although again, it would be helpful for those of us who would actually use it, if anyone does. Just pointing out that complaints would still be inevitable, and it's possible the filter wouldn't be too effective.
Along with that, highlighting seems like a nice idea, would be nicer if it put highlighted threads at the top of a page.
Oh, and one more thing.
>>1"Sometimes saging doesn't work."
Saging doesn't actually do anything to a thread, FYI.
It's not a downvote, a 'go kill yourself OP' button, an 'anti-bump', nor a method in itself for explicitly saying you don't like a thread. All it does it stop your post from bumping the thread, and can be used to:
a) politely keep a thread from bumping with off-topic conversation (by giving other threads a chance to be at the top)
b) point out something minor (if you feel the comment in itself was not enough to justify putting it above every other thread)
c) mention that a thread is misplaced, and should be moved elsewhere, if appropriate.
While it appears that people use it as a sort of 'downvote', the only negative thing it's actually doing to a thread is limiting the amount of maximum posts (besides that one) from 1337 to 1336, which isn't a noticeable difference, considering it's likely that said thread was never going to reach 1337 posts anyway.
