just posted to another server that was talking about it

A stricter vetting system

Would be nice

would need a link if anyone is trying to get back though

The problem with no vetting

Is that

If we do a partnership

We would lose potential members

Vetting just gets 100 people stuck in the border who are too lazy to answer questions

We just need a gestapo to take care of nignogs

^this

explain to me why in the blue shit I was pinged 4,000 times

please

also some people get paranoid with vetting depending on what you ask...

r a i d bruther

The thing I also question here

Is this really a right wing server? Or a third position server?

If ancap is banned, there is no point of calling this right wing

As ancap is the dominant far right ideology

@Not as Depressed Gaddafi how so you lose members by doing a partnership?

@grilomoto I say you lose by not doing a partnership

I am just saying

1. Better vetting system

@Not as Depressed Gaddafi who said anything about banning ancap?

2. Self assignable roles (if necessary)

3. Rebrand the server (this feels more this position than right wing)

I know what happened

I was there

When it happened

@Not as Depressed Gaddafi vetting how? and rebranding to what?

@grilomoto so

2 ideas for vetting

1. Self vetting, where you answer the questions, the bot asks you if you agree to the rules, and you are held accountable to the rules when you use the server past that phase

2. Manual review for all vetting

But stricter

Rebranding how?

The *right* cafe

How more obvious can you get

A logo with a wing pointing right

And you still have to agree to the rules and TOS to get in