Comment by bheadmaster
1 year ago
> Yes, that's all you've been doing.
No, in the comment you've originally replied to I have clearly stated a possible explanation of why 4chan has a bad reputation. Please refrain from pointless "no u" comments, and attack my arguments instead.
> But 4chan wears its infamy on its sleeve with pride (usually white pride.)
4chan is not an entity onto itself - it is composed of many individuals, that was the whole point of my post. But because you don't know the identity of those individuals, you just consider them a monolith and put collective blame onto them.
Additionaly, the official rule 3. of 4chan states:
You will not post any of the following outside /b/:
[...]
b. Racism
[...]
> But go ahead and take the last laugh. You're being neither clever nor insightful here.
Please refrain from personal insults. See https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html:
When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."
> 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/?
Yes.
On /b/, all legal (in the US) content is permitted. It serves as a sort of containment board for the degenerates to shitpost, leaving other boards alone. Nobody takes any content from /b/ seriously, and the nickname for /b/ users is "/b/tards".
In fact, /b/ is just a small part of 4chan, one that most users actually loathe, but which seems to be the most highlighted in public consciousness. Probably due to its complete lack of censorship, which seems to be frowned upon in this day and age.
> Nobody takes any content from /b/ seriously.
That's a bold claim. It requires a single counter-example to disprove. I take it seriously, so your statement is empirically wrong. Please retract it.
7 replies →
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.
The purpose of the phrase "this is idiotic" isn't to inform, but to insult. It contains no useful information whatsoever.
> Would it be ok to praise the quality of the argument? If so, it should be ok to criticize it as well.
Why would the former imply the latter? It is ok to give gifts to people, but not to steal from them.
> It contains no useful information whatsoever.
It’s a claim about the nature of an argument. Do you believe it’s not possible for an argument to be idiotic?
> Why would the former imply the latter?
Because restricting speech that’s critical leads to a degradation of the quality of dialog.
Idiotic arguments exist. So do spurious arguments, disingenuous arguments, bad arguments, pointless arguments, dishonest arguments, and so on. Which of those adjectives would you like to ban when discussing the quality of an argument?
1 reply →