What do you think of 4chan?

[Pools2013]

Title.

[Goose]

steam OT is a more unlikable 4chan.

[GlaceonChireiden]

4chan is fun. It's crude and full of problematic ideas, but that's the point. They do that because it's the best form of gatekeeping, they're keeping out the undesirables.

The only people who stay around 4chan are also the kind of people they want to interact with.

You can have some genuinely nice conversations depending on where you go. If you visit boards like /pol/ then obviously you're going to be met with a bunch of annoying people, that's just part of political discussion, but if you hang around places like /v/ then some fun can be had.

[76561198134306395]

good place I say.

[ナルゴ]

CookieClicker :)님이 먼저 게시:

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

In a way, sure - but 4chan isn't like Reddit where any individual can create a subreddit and thus you cannot generalize that one subreddit represents the whole Reddit.

What's even the point of saying this if you know that out of all the subreddits, only a dozen or so are actually frequented by people?

Yeah what a pointless generalization.
Apparently it doesn't matter if people actively avoid garbage boards to discuss their hobbies; art, shows, technology, origami, board games, etc....
The site small bro. The big boards represent you. You're totally part of the my little pony and anti-semite pro-hamas crowd.

If anything, 4chan is much less of an echochamber and a much more diverse hub of ideas because everyone's posting anonymously and you can't mindlessly bury posts with downvotes.

[TWPanda77]

I do not think anything about it. I have not been to the site before and I am I sure that I never will.

[🍋 Lemonfed 🍋]

the only time I hear about it it's always when terrible things are said or horrible things happen.

[Dom]

CookieClicker :)님이 먼저 게시:

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

In a way, sure - but 4chan isn't like Reddit where any individual can create a subreddit and thus you cannot generalize that one subreddit represents the whole Reddit.

What's even the point of saying this if you know that out of all the subreddits, only a dozen or so are actually frequented by people?

The fact that there's user freedom and users tend to have more saying in terms of what the platform is like. Reddit isn't a site where the admins have created 70 pre-existing subs that people are "stuck" with. Instead it is very divided as a whole, into smaller pieces. There are approximately 200,000 active communities.

I know pol doesn't represent the entirety of 4chan but it is still a rather big portion of it. I don't know if anyone can deny that.

[ナルゴ]

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

CookieClicker :)님이 먼저 게시:

What's even the point of saying this if you know that out of all the subreddits, only a dozen or so are actually frequented by people?

The fact that there's user freedom and users tend to have more saying in terms of what the platform is like. Reddit isn't a site where the admins have created 70 pre-existing subs that people are "stuck" with. Instead it is very divided as a whole, into smaller pieces.

I know pol doesn't represent the entirety of 4chan but it is still a rather big portion of it. I don't know if anyone can deny that.

https://4stats.io
If you count the average posts per day of the top 15 boards
621866
/pol/ only contributes 1/5 of that. Even less if you account for the rest of the site.
A fraction of the userbase accounts for all the rest?

Okay Mr. team red are x, all 4chan users are y. We get it, you like generalizing. Painting broad strokes over people.

[apathy]

Navigating it is still a pain in the backside.

[Dom]

Nargo님이 먼저 게시:

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

The fact that there's user freedom and users tend to have more saying in terms of what the platform is like. Reddit isn't a site where the admins have created 70 pre-existing subs that people are "stuck" with. Instead it is very divided as a whole, into smaller pieces.

I know pol doesn't represent the entirety of 4chan but it is still a rather big portion of it. I don't know if anyone can deny that.

https://4stats.io
If you count the average posts per day of the top 15 boards
621866
/pol/ only contributes 1/5 of that. Even less if you account for the rest of the site.
A fraction of the userbase accounts for all the rest?

Okay Mr. team red are x, all 4chan users are y. We get it, you like generalizing. Painting broad strokes over people.

I don't think I "generalize" by pointing out that it is a significant percentage of the site, really.
I never said that it's all of it.

The reason why it is a significant percentage is because it has gotten its own board on a popular platform that has a limited amount of boards.

If Reddit were narrowed down into say, 50 subreddits and there wouldn't exist more of them, people would use those 50 subreddits as a way to characterize the site.

And I don't know if that would be wrong. The admins would have huge saying in terms of what those subreddits would be.

[Dom]

CookieClicker :)님이 먼저 게시:

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

know pol doesn't represent the entirety of 4chan but it is still a rather big portion of it. I don't know if anyone can deny that.

On a surface level, it does.

But if you break it down and account for all the bots and spammers, you will soon find that it's not as big as you think it is (same principle also applies to reddit, which is kinda notorious for it's bot problems).

Believe it or not, there's more to life than politisperging.

Sure there is. I don't consider 4chan to be solely a political platform. I just wanted to point out that considering its limited amount of boards, it is more specific what it is targeted for in comparison to some platforms where people can create their own communities that serve their very own purpose.

[ナルゴ]

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

Nargo님이 먼저 게시:

https://4stats.io
If you count the average posts per day of the top 15 boards
621866
/pol/ only contributes 1/5 of that. Even less if you account for the rest of the site.
A fraction of the userbase accounts for all the rest?

Okay Mr. team red are x, all 4chan users are y. We get it, you like generalizing. Painting broad strokes over people.

I don't think I "generalize" by pointing out that it is a significant percentage of the site, really.
I never said that it's all of it.

The reason why it is a significant percentage is because it has gotten its own board on a popular platform that has a limited amount of boards.

If Reddit were narrowed down into say, 50 subreddits and there wouldn't exist more of them, people would use those 50 subreddits as a way to characterize the site.

And I don't know if that would be wrong. The admins would have huge saying in terms of what those subreddits would be.

It's specifically a response to this.

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

Sir Seanicus, Esq.님이 먼저 게시:

It's very easy to see whose been brainwashed by the corporate alphabet soup media. They think one board (/pol/ or /b/ which are honeypots) is pretty much the entire website. Oh well, ignorance is bliss.

In a way, sure - but 4chan isn't like Reddit where any individual can create a subreddit and thus you cannot generalize that one subreddit represents the whole Reddit.

However, with 4chan there are a limited amount of boards (that users cannot create) and they are also very specific. Because of the limited amount, one board is a big portion of the site itself.

Someone pointed out that /pol/ or /b/ isn't the entire site. However you keep implying the contrary.

4chan is not homogeneous. It's separated into different boards for a reason. Not even entire boards are homogeneous.
Including /pol/. The board is full of pro-hamas/pro-israel, pro-ukraine/pro-russia, pro-trump/pro-biden. etc.

Even individual threads in the same board can have wildly different consensus on a subject.

And I've already pointed out the numbers. To think that /pol/ is an accurate representation of the entire site is frankly offensive. I hate that board and I'm a 4chan user, and here you are basically lumping me together with them.

It's tantamount to saying a fraction represents the whole. This is the kind of oversimplified thinking, lacking all nuance, that leads to "all muslims are terrorists".

[permanent name]

/pol/ is custom tailored to be an accurate representation of the site in micro, so that its rhetoric can be exported around the boards.

[chillydogs]

Hey, I've seen this one before!

[Dom]

Nargo님이 먼저 게시:

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

I don't think I "generalize" by pointing out that it is a significant percentage of the site, really.
I never said that it's all of it.

The reason why it is a significant percentage is because it has gotten its own board on a popular platform that has a limited amount of boards.

If Reddit were narrowed down into say, 50 subreddits and there wouldn't exist more of them, people would use those 50 subreddits as a way to characterize the site.

And I don't know if that would be wrong. The admins would have huge saying in terms of what those subreddits would be.

It's specifically a response to this.

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

In a way, sure - but 4chan isn't like Reddit where any individual can create a subreddit and thus you cannot generalize that one subreddit represents the whole Reddit.

However, with 4chan there are a limited amount of boards (that users cannot create) and they are also very specific. Because of the limited amount, one board is a big portion of the site itself.

Someone pointed out that /pol/ or /b/ isn't the entire site. However you keep implying the contrary.

4chan is not homogeneous. It's separated into different boards for a reason. Not even entire boards are homogeneous.
Including /pol/. The board is full of pro-hamas/pro-israel, pro-ukraine/pro-russia, pro-trump/pro-biden. etc.

Even individual threads in the same board can have wildly different consensus on a subject.

And I've already pointed out the numbers. To think that /pol/ is an accurate representation of the entire site is frankly offensive. I hate that board and I'm a 4chan user, and here you are basically lumping me together with them.

It's tantamount to saying a fraction represents the whole. This is the kind of oversimplified thinking, lacking all nuance, that leads to "all muslims are terrorists".

I implied that it would be fairer to see it as some characterization of the site because there isn't user freedom when it comes to these boards and site owners can decide what these boards are. And there must be some reasoning as to why the boards are what they are - mostly that is due to the fact that they aim to reflect the userbase.

Though given that it isn't the whole site and acknowledging that too. But if they add a new board into this limited pool of boards, people may question why they specifically ask that one, etc. So there's some characterization and trying to appeal to the typical target users.