Comment by bheadmaster

> what the most opinionated people are really thinking when there are no filters and rules to silence them

I'm not sure what "most opinionated" would mean or how'd you determine relative levels, but I would bet whatever metric you chose wouldn't find the most opinionated people on 4chan. Also just because people say things online doesn't mean they actually hold that opinion.

> I 100% agree with them that child and human trafficking is a big issue in this world and some of the most powerful people are definitely involved

Oh, ok, you weren't actually responding to the parent comment at all.

Which variety of wojak spam do you find most insightful?

The thing is, everyone already knew that child and human trafficking is a big issue in this world. No one needed to wade through the cesspool to find that out. But 4chan doesn't actually give a damn about the kids. They got obsessed with phantom sex cults under pizzerias and decoding gematria in emails because they wanted to undermine Hillary Clinton's election and because they got completely washed by actual non-ironic nazis who believe all "leftists" in power (IE the Democratic Party) are pedophiles because they equate LGBT with pedophilia and, by extension, Democratic support for the former with a likely predilection for the other.

And then they came up with QAnon, not out of any sincere concern for "the children," but just as a shitpost that took off because it was too on the nose, and now legitimate efforts to curb child abuse are being hamstrung by this insane obsession they've bred into the zeitgeist to see trans people as "groomers" and secret pedo conspiracies everywhere.

And yet, even though they'll gladly take credit for it, none of them saw Epstein coming. Sure, one anon posted about Epstein's death before it hit the news. That's about all they can legitimately take credit for, but overall they've done more harm than good.

> 4chan is not an entity onto itself - it is composed of many individuals

It, like every other community, has an aggregate identity built from the contributions of the individuals within the community.

> Additionaly, the official rule 3. of 4chan states [racism is only allowed in /b/]

If you honestly believe that /b/ is the only place on 4chan where you will find racist sentiment you need to have your head examined.

But you can still post racism inside /b/?

On the rest of 4chan outside of /b/, you'll find lots of racist comments. Particularly on /pol/, but there are plenty even ignoring that board. You can report particular posts for breaking the "racism outside of /b/" rule, but it's very hit-or-miss whether the rule is enforced.

Strictly speaking, “That is idiotic” does apply to the argument, as written in the quote. It’s not a personal insult, it’s a characterization of the quality of the argument.

I suppose the rules are trying to say that you should avoid such characterizations, but that’s a dubious rule.

Would it be ok to praise the quality of the argument? If so, it should be ok to criticize it as well. Not all arguments are as clear cut as 1+1=2, and there are other criteria by which arguments can be evaluated.