The owner of notorious message board 4chan has sold the forum to the former owner of its Japanese "inspiration," 2channel. After more than a decade running the "free speech" site, Christopher Poole announced on Monday that he had sold the cyber-cesspool, which boasts 20 million monthly visitors, to Hiroyuki Nishimura. He did …
Not surprising that he's finally packed it in.
Gamergate is what killed 4chan, more than anything else. After the Zoey Quinn affair came to a head last year, the site devolved into a left-vs-right political shitfest that drowned out everything else.
Poole then made it worse by replacing the /pol/ and /b/ moderators with SJW friends of his new girlfriend who then immediately banned any anti-feminist or pro-gamergate posts, while allowing the pro-feminist ones to flood every thread. Any form of politically incorrect humour or jokes brought down the wrath of the SJW horde within minutes. Every "hot chicks" thread got derailed by screams of "stop objectifying women!" while gay/male porn threads went unchallenged. And the traditional "tits or gtfo" earned an instant permaban.
This predictably led to a mass exodus of long-term /b/tards to alternative chans, dividing the userbase and spelling the end of 4chan's dominance of the internet underground.
Sadly, this means the political mudslinging has infested the other chans as well, so what used to be a great source of black humour - the main reason I originally went to such sites in the first place - has sadly passed into the pages of history, flooded under a tsunami of progressive-vs-conservative hate war.
"has sadly passed into the pages of history"
... just like Bernard Manning. Idiot Dead Racist Bernard Manning.
The thing about free speech sites is that one has to also accept that if the site is being overrun by people who think people there are being dicks, then maybe people are being dicks.
I had enough discussions with gamergaters to realise that what people meant when they pejoratively used the term SJW, is they meant "someone who had an argument to which [the gamergater] had no response other than to call them SJWs". It's like the troll generation's variant of "Yeah? Well, and Your Mum! ner ner can't hear you". I therefore always read the epithet SJW to be a term of endearment. A congratulation for thinking. I mean, even the term itself is an underlining of lack of thought on behalf of those that use it. Its usage is (sincerely) hilarious.
The irony of people who whinge about people who defend the rights of others infiltrating their hate sites and arguing with them, yet go on about free speech only adds to the humour.
Sure, there are dicks on both sides... there are people who try to attack stupid (The idea of banning robot sex toys, being a good current example). But when a group resorts to lumping <all people who disagree with possible violence/misogyny/etc of post x> into a bucket of "liberal SJWs" is at best, lazy, but in the norm, just an exposition of their low level of thinking.
4chan, circa 1940:
Anonymous: 06/04/40(Tue)09:20:20 No.4456477:
about This new "The Eternal Jew" film - ' You can't call Jews "Vermin" - that's awful"
Goebbels: 06/04/40(Tue)09:22:55 No.4456488:
>> "SJW SCHWIENHUND FAG"
Hitler: 06/04/40(Tue)09:28:55 No.4458668:
Mike Godwin : 06/04/40(Tue)09:35:39 No.4456499:
>> careful now.
"The problem with the typical SJW, in my experience, has been that they know SFA about society, justice or war. Defend them if it makes you feel OK, but most of them are shrill anti-everythings bathed in a lack of logic."
Conversely, that's exactly the same experience I've had with many of those who have used the term against others. That's not undermining your experience at all. I'm just outlining how such stereotyping terms (especially those used solely in pejorative use) are generally very weak in real debate as it ends up being "You're X" versus "Yeah, but you're Y".
I'm certainly not trying to defend "them" - as I don't really think there's a "them" to defend. I'm just laughing at the SJW concept as a whole. When an argument resorts to using such terms (either way around) then the whole debate just becomes ad hominem.* Which doesn't progress any form of debate in either direction.
It's no better than when people complain about "Political Correctness, gone Mad" when what they really have an argument against is that society as a whole is no longer letting them be assholes. Ahh. Diddums.
* Caveat on my attack on Bernard Manning, which I think is acceptable, since i simply think he was an ignorant git.
"The thing about free speech sites is that one has to also accept that if the site is being overrun by people who think people there are being dicks, then maybe people are being dicks."
So by that statement I can infer that you think gang-war tactics in flooding a site with political rhetoric is acceptable? I wonder if you would still think so when the tables were turned; that is, if 4chan were to raid a Jezebel forum with misogynistic commentary en masse, to the point where they drowned out the topic of discussion in every thread, you would call those "overrunning the site", "trolls."
The reason SJW is a pejorative term is because such people are, first and foremost, hypocrites. The term itself refers to the Authoritarian Left - those who have decided that the world must be run a certain way and relentlessly attack, using the same tactics they condemn in others, anyone who goes against that agenda.
Fighting for peace is like fucking for chastity. SJWs may have a noble objective, but their employment of hypocrisy and bullying tactics in trying to achieve that end is sullying the end by the means. In other words, they are acting exactly as the fascists they are so fond of condemning did - they are justifying their means by their ends. They aren't making any effort to understand why people think and act the way they do, or to accept that they have differing worldviews; they have simply created in their minds an "ideal human" - a non-misogynist, non-homophobic, non-racist, lets-all-hold-hands-and-sing-happy-clappy-songs angel - and are forcefully trying, by bullying, shaming, and destroying others, to fit them into their predefined mould.
And people are fighting back, as they have fought against everyone throughout history who mistakenly believed in the perfectibility of human nature.
... by three-ish decades. And Fido was around before that. And BBSes were around before that.
What? You kids think YOU invented it?
More to the point ... why do parents STILL allow their sprog unfettered access to the tawdry underbelly of global communications?
Mostly because they're going to find it anyway and I can make the forbidden fruit bitter by not forbidding it. My kids aren't old enough to dive deep in the net's dark places yet* but when they're old enough to start searching and finding, I intend to show them around those places.
An actual demonstration of these things with Dad strikes me as equal parts dull and embarrassing. Should work perfectly.
*not that most of 4chan was ever dark, ask an bunch of anonymous posters about something they're all interested in ( the /fit/ board was a good example) and generally you'll get 5 trolls, two of whom immediately start trolling each other, six irrelevant answers (which get trolled) and three valid but different opinions containing actual researched advice. Once you learn to troll-filter it's a valuable resource.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019