Some feedback regarding Guides section

[felix920506]

I don't see anywhere dedicated to feedfack for the forum so I am posting it here.

From my understanding, the guides section is intended for people who don't really know what they are doing. Therefore I think it is very important to have a system in place against content that can be harmful to people who follow them. I would propose the following:

1. Guides that violate other platforms' TOSes should be entirely disallowed. (ex. JF behind Cloudflare)
2. Guides that have conflicting information with the Official Docs should be disallowed (Or disclaimed AT THE VERY TOP if the docs changed after the guide was made causing the conflict if the issue isn't related to security).
3. Require guides clearly disclaim when misconfiguration can cause harm and the potential consequences (ex. Accidentally setting a JF domain to "proxied" instead of "DNS only" in Cloudflare can lead to a terminated Cloudflare account)

[Venson]

Hey @felix920506

In my opinion your points are valid however:
1. Guide(s) that talk about violating platform TOSes already got disclaimers added afterwards (by me). But we are not aware of other violations, however if you are aware of issues with other existing guides please say so either here or PM me or ping me on matrix.
2. The docs are not perfect but neither are the guides. If you find wrong information, please contribute to that guide directly and say so to the author maybe its just a mistake? But be aware i also did recently made a guide about episode grouping that contrasts the guide while still being true and correct.
3. That point is a tricky one. I would say that all guides in this forum are pretty much implicitly under the disclaimer: "DO AT OWN RISK, BACKUP EVERYTHING" as the guides are community written (mostly). That holds also true for the official Doku, everything you do is under no guarantee, warranty or any promise from the JF team. Its still a community driven project.

[felix920506]

The main problem I have with the current system is the following:

 Guide(s) that talk about violating platform TOSes already got disclaimers added afterwards (by me)

While it is true that disclaimers have been added, they are buried deep in the comments, which defeats their purposes. While I think disclaimers added by the moderation team would also work, they should be in places that are actually visible, such as edited into the top of the post or in a pinned comment. I think the current system for handling "pinned comments" defeats their purpose as:
1. It is clearly broken in dark mode. (As the attached photo)
2. It requires users to click on a link to see it, rather than displaying it directly in front of the users.

Other than that I think your points are valid.

[Venson]

The main problem I have with the current system is the following:

 Guide(s) that talk about violating platform TOSes already got disclaimers added afterwards (by me)

While it is true that disclaimers have been added, they are buried deep in the comments, which defeats their purposes. While I think disclaimers added by the moderation team would also work, they should be in places that are actually visible, such as edited into the top of the post or in a pinned comment. I think the current system for handling "pinned comments" defeats their purpose as:
1. It is clearly broken in dark mode. (As the attached photo)
2. It requires users to click on a link to see it, rather than displaying it directly in front of the users.

Other than that I think your points are valid.

I very much agree with you on that point and i raised it before with the team we are somewhat limited on what the forum software can do there. This is a "compromise" with the pin on top.
With the edit, i will take that recommendation to our internal discussion.