>>4684162Here, have a comparison between the arguments for keeping this and for changing this:
Positives:
- the previous captcha was awful at times, with the images taking more time to load than it takes to solve this one, you can probably even attempt this 3 times and match the time of a slowed down captcha v1
- those who are complaining are either bots (hard to solve but easy to spot, they never mattered and never will) or idiots (which nobody wants anyway)
- keeps your pattern recognition in check; you just have to aim to match one easy-to-see-through part and the rest comes together easily, it feels more engaging than the previous one
Now, for the negatives I read in this thread so far:
- it's hard to solve
- it takes too much time
- it's cancer
- it will kill the website
- too variant, too hard, disruptive pattern
I've been actively posting on /pol/ for the last few hours and while unreadable captchas do happen sometimes you can just try again.
>too variantThe current variance is 4 to 5 letters & numbers and sometimes a slider which you have to adjust to see the captcha at all.
>too hardThis isn't an argument and merely admitting that the poster is a fucking retard.
>disruptive patternSee what I wrote earlier; if you're poor at pattern recognition and struggle with matching this, chances are you shouldn't be on this website.
It does sometimes fuck it up but as I'll be repeating for the 3rd fucking time - the amount of time it takes an average autist to attempt this captcha is still less than the old one, regardless of how long the old one took.
Give me an argument as to why this captcha shouldn't be kept around without resorting to the shit I already addressed, otherwise you can fuck off and lock the thread because there's nothing more to suggest aside from making it harder.
Thanks for reading my blogpost, now shoo and get your bots to post 9000 more times.
