>>4289771that could be interesting. i'll push back on a couple of points.
i think the brand generals you couldn't clearly designate gear as opposed to photo. at least, i can speak on /fag/ and maybe i'm biased, but to me it's more of a photo thread posing as a gear thread than the other way around. or i guess it's both, in a way that i think is genuinely helpful and good for an online community to have. i could be persuaded otherwise tho.
my other qualm is about "not poster's own artwork". i think /p/ has this weird fixation on expecting users to only post their own work which doesn't show up in other boards on creative hobbies, or at least not to the same degree. maybe places like /ic/ are different. as far as i've seen on /fa/ and /mu/, there will be zero-one thread usually, maybe two at Best where posters post their own work. not that those are shining examples of healthy boards, but you can see that things still function. it most likely stems from photography having such a lower barrier to entry to produce a single work, but i think this attitude is detrimental to board quality. i would love for people to post others' pictures that made an impression on them. it would widen a lot of users' views for one, and it would make the best use of the imageboard format secondly. the endless circles of >nophoto >not doxxing myself that result in photoless posts on an image board designated for photography blows my mind. to me this is a sign that something is fundamentally wrong. it should be common practice to accompany comments with a photo that is not your own if you prefer not to risk doxxing. if we're not posting photos here, what's the point.
those are my responses. ultimately, i like your idea of overhauling the board
>>4289773>>4289776what types of threads should replace generals, ideally?