user restrictions upon thread creation

[qwk]

When I create a thread, I'd like to be able to restrict the users who are allowed to post in it.
E.g., I won't let newbies make a post.
Or, if I'm feeling 1337, I'll only allow Legendarys to post. Oh, and myself, of course

I could also create a thread in scam accusation where I'll accuse someone and only allow him specifically to speak up for himself. I.e. a private conversation in public.

I mean, right now I can moderate my own threads, so I could just start a self-moderated thread and delete any posts by newbies anyway.
I guess that would make adamstgBit kind of unemployed, no longer having to clean up the mess that the wall observer

Features needed: blacklist / whitelist for the thread with "groups" like newbies being an option on the lists.

[1714051489]

1714051489

[1714051489]

1714051489

[1714051489]

1714051489

[redsn0w]

This will be a sort of censorship or am I wrong? I understand what you wanted to say/request but I don't agree with you, sorry. It will be really an useless idea restrict who can post in your thread/topic because it will destroy the concept of a forum.

[qwk]

This will be a sort of censorship or am I wrong? I understand what you wanted to say/request but I don't agree with you, sorry. It will be really an useless idea restrict who can post in your thread/topic because it will destroy the concept of a forum.

As mentioned before, I can already censor whatever I feel like in my self-moderated threads, so why not at least make it obvious?

In other words, right now, if I don't want newbie posts, I let them post and delete it.
Why go through the hassle of them writing and me deleting if I don't want their posts anyway?
If you dogmatically oppose censorship, you shouldn't use bitcointalk in the first place.

[redsn0w]

This will be a sort of censorship or am I wrong? I understand what you wanted to say/request but I don't agree with you, sorry. It will be really an useless idea restrict who can post in your thread/topic because it will destroy the concept of a forum.

As mentioned before, I can already censor whatever I feel like in my self-moderated threads, so why not at least make it obvious?

In other words, right now, if I don't want newbie posts, I let them post and delete it.
Why go through the hassle of them writing and me deleting if I don't want their posts anyway?
If you dogmatically oppose censorship, you shouldn't use bitcointalk in the first place.

I am opposed to any form of censorship and this is why when I will see an self-mod thread I'll open a new thread because I don't want that that my opinion will be canceled/deleted (because it will be contrary with the OP's opinion). However you are right when you said "Why go through the hassle of them writing and me deleting if I don't want their posts anyway?" ... It will be really interesting read what an admin think of your proposal .

[hilariousandco]

It has been suggested before and if threads can be self-modded then this would make things easier. Remember, you can also create a local rule barring trouble makers from your threads as well so it would work for that as well. I agree with redsnow though and don't agree with such censorship but that's up to the individual whether they want to do it or not and if they want to I'm not going to try censor that either (and again like redsnow said people can just create another thread if they want to discuss or provide criticism or posts that would likely get deleted).

[qwk]

Just in case anyone wondered why I propose that kind of censorship:
"Wall Observer" is a perfect example. Some kiddies just love to spam the thread with stupid posts like "Bitcoin is dead", "Sell before it's too late", "You're all stupid", you get the idea. Often including loads of images, sometimes not very nice to look at. It's probably just one or two trolls who regularly do this.
Now, the obvious solution would be to ignore those kids.
The problem is, they always generate new accounts, having their old accounts banned.
You can't ignore them, you can't ban them, and they're pretty annoying.
A setting like "only users with 10 Activity are allowed to post in this thread" would suffice to totally eliminate the problem.

[stingers]

This will be a sort of censorship or am I wrong? I understand what you wanted to say/request but I don't agree with you, sorry. It will be really an useless idea restrict who can post in your thread/topic because it will destroy the concept of a forum.

Aren't we allowed to have certain local thread rules, like da dice campaign has for marcotheminer , they have disallowed him from posting there. I guess this feature will just help in enforcing that local rule.

[hilariousandco]

Yes, read my post above.

[redsn0w]

This will be a sort of censorship or am I wrong? I understand what you wanted to say/request but I don't agree with you, sorry. It will be really an useless idea restrict who can post in your thread/topic because it will destroy the concept of a forum.

Aren't we allowed to have certain local thread rules, like da dice campaign has for marcotheminer , they have disallowed him from posting there. I guess this feature will just help in enforcing that local rule.

Yes, we are allowed to have 'certain' local thread rules but the OP wants an automatic function to choose during the creation of the topic (and why not also after - thread edit).

[shorena]

This will be a sort of censorship or am I wrong? I understand what you wanted to say/request but I don't agree with you, sorry. It will be really an useless idea restrict who can post in your thread/topic because it will destroy the concept of a forum.

Aren't we allowed to have certain local thread rules, like da dice campaign has for marcotheminer , they have disallowed him from posting there. I guess this feature will just help in enforcing that local rule.

Yes, we are allowed to have 'certain' local thread rules but the OP wants an automatic function to choose during the creation of the topic (and why not also after - thread edit).

Well an automated version would reduce the load on the mods. E.g. my "[EDU] Faucets" thread has a local rule to prohibit links to faucets. I dont want the thread to be used as advertising thread. I never had that much people violating the rule, but its still work for the mods if it happens and the user can not be convinced via PM. A simple scratch like[1] way to set up local rules programmatically would reduce the work load for mods greatly. This might be tricky to implement savely though, so a simpler version would just be a couple of checkboxes or tags and still be able to map most of the local rules (e.g. no links, not user X, no users with less than X activity/posts/whatever).

As with self moderated threads you would still be free to open a thread discussion the processes in the threads with automated local rules.

Im pretty sure this will not be implemented in the current version of the board, but it might be something that can be done (more) easily with epochtalk.

[1] https://scratch.mit.edu/

[fronti]

This feature may be useful.
In addition an extension to this feature:

if a non white listed user post to your thread, only you as thread creator can see this and you can then decide to "enable" the post and white list the user.
problem with this may be an overloaded thread owner and the thread owner will be marked as censor if he did not enable the post...

I know, this is not a standard feature in most forum software (i did not know one where this is implemented) but we can dream on new features