|
Woolie Wool posted:The unmoderated hivemind nature of *chan type sites causes the groups with the largest social capital to easily dominate the conversation due to their outsized influence and weight of social consensus Right. Plus the unmoderated nature of the site means you're going to be getting a lot of extreme rhetoric and gross-out stuff, which drive away "moderates" and people who aren't highly motivated to participate in it, which means even the most moderate statements (like, "women aren't inferior") face a huge uphill battle.
|
#
¿
May 14, 2015 04:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:54 |
|
|
computer parts posted:I don't think appending "fag" to the end of each noun was really more leftist than the status quo. "tits or gtfo" - definitely a reaction to the Obama presidency.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
Luminous Obscurity posted:Something I find interesting is the similarities between gamer/nerd culture and US army culture. Men's insecurities play defining roles in each and you can see the same sort of high school PTSD and fear of women from both camps. I kind of want to put together an effortpost on it because its pretty shocking just how close the two group are as far as philosophy goes. Find time to do that please, that's interesting. More than likely it'll get shitposted pretty quickly but  LeftistMuslimObama posted:I think a lot of the misogyny and hypermachismo you see in gamer/nerd culture is a desire not to be seen as feminine. In real life, a lot of people who get categorized as nerds are often ridiculed for being unathletic, for being uninterested in sports, for being weak or small, or any number of other traits that are often identified as "feminine". In their desire to assert themselves as "not a girl", and aided by the anonymity of places like 4chan, they go way too far in the other direction. People who argue with their bombastic, MRA-style rhetoric only cause them to dig in more because they perceive criticism as an attack on their manhood rather than as constructive feedback. It's a perfect storm of human beings with a completely diminished ego and a powerful drive to go defensive immediately when criticized. Yeah, saying again that's a good read. I'm sure it affects the rampant misogyny, given that when you look at their rhetoric (and here I'm talking about a wide swath of young guys online, incels, mras, etc.) their narrative is that women go for "bad" guys who mistreat them instead of nice guys (in fact there's a thread about that in a/t), so being the bad guy that disrespects women is like, the most masculine, unfeminine thing possible. However I don't think it's a totally sufficient explanation for, say, the virulent racism.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:You say that like its a bad thing? Their free culture is more vibrant and alive than SA's... Personally I would say that yes, a "bastion for anti-feminism and reactionary beliefs" is a bad thing. Though your definition of good and bad here seems to be based on number of memes produced or something, regardless of whether the content is "black people are subhuman."
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
Cliff Racer you should start a thread about how bad SA is because apparently you're really eager to talk about that. Or heck, start a thread about sjws cause that's a topic you keep dancing around.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
Merdifex posted:I'd like to point out that I don't think there's any way to quantify and as such empirically compare the content outputs of different internet communities, so stating that this or that community produces "more and better content" is pure supposition. You kind of can, but it's going to involve a certain amount of qualitative study no matter how you do it. You'd develop a set of things you wanted to measure, get your data sets, and do a content analysis. Something like "funnier" content is purely subjective, but things like "no. of positive replies per post" is somewhat less so.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
Bullfrog posted:Look at all that hard-hitting, creative content. So I guess this brings back the issue of why there are so many people on that page tripping all over themselves to be racist homophobes. Effectronica posted:You got any statistical data? Because anecdotal evidence from reminisces of pulp authors and the letters pages of old comics suggest substantial numbers of women read them, and other anecdotes suggest racial diversity as well I think it's fair to say that the majority of the content was created and consumed by white guys, with all the social biases that were dominant at the time, but that there was a significant strain of diverse and progressive elements involved, right? I mean, early Superman, for example. Even focusing just on the creators doesn't tell a complete story of course; for example Star Trek slash fiction, created by an audience the network wasn't even paying attention to, basically invented the genre of modern fan fiction., which often works tangentially to or in opposition to the narrative as seen by the creators, and even most fans. Not that fan / slash fiction doesn't have its own host of issues.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:It's a pretty interesting topic. I've noticed that posters on 4chan get really testy when someone breaks anonymity in some way. People who use tripcodes to give themselves a name are disliked, announcing you're a girl or a minority of some kind when it's not relevant is met with derision, and so on. It does bring a sense of informality and equality that not many sites have when everything is going pretty well (no one is trolling and trying to piss certain groups off); your personal social status, [whether you're well-off or poor, male or female, majority or minority, or whatever does not matter, only what you post. Granted, it falls apart once any sort of politics is mentioned, but it's pretty neat to post on even footing with others. No need for putting on a facade and trying to act like someone you aren't. It does matter. You just said "announcing you're a girl or a minority of some kind when it's not relevant is met with derision." Why should it be met with derision? Does announcing that you're a guy when it's not relevant get met with derision? Why should women and minorities expect to be met with derision if they happen to let it slip that they aren't white males? Which, as has been said twice, is the default assumption? "Let's assume everyone is a white guy until suggested otherwise, then let's deride them" isn't equality or even footing. You literally said that a woman has to be careful not to reveal that she's a woman, otherwise people will attack her for it. This isn't the case for men. How is that possibly equal footing? SunAndSpring posted:Yeah, it's what I said. Bringing up anything political like race relations, gender, etc. breaks the illusion because, obviously, not everybody fits in the typical 4chan poster archetype. Still, it's pretty nice when it works. How is it "pretty nice" for everyone to assume everyone else is a white male, under threat of derision and vitriol if they let it slip they aren't? Also you're making an assumption that this assumption ("we're all white guys") isn't in fact political. It is. Sharkie fucked around with this message at 05:14 on May 15, 2015 |
|
#
¿
May 15, 2015 05:12
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:Maybe I'm not explaining my position well. I don't think it's right or good that you can't just off-handedly mention "I'm a lady" or something and not get poo poo for it on 4chan. I just think that it's the closest you can get to real equal footing currently. So the best that can currently be done, and currently is being done, is that if you let it slip you're a woman you'll get poo poo for it? I mean you did just call it "the closest you can get to real equal footing currently." Actually, there are actually many websites and discussion forums where you can mention your gender and not get attacked for it. If you're actually looking for places like that, and aren't in fact content to stay in "we're all white guys, attack anyone who's not"-land, then I'm sorry you haven't found better spaces.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2015 05:34
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:To be honest, I'm beginning to think even the whole "equal footing" thing I was talking about doesn't really work. People are still jockeying for the attention and adulation you get for saying "right" opinions there, it's just usually tied to one thread than an entire posting history. Maybe I've just got an idealized concept of what I want anonymous posting to be. Yeah, you do. That's understandable I guess as it's hyped by a lot of people in a lot of places, especially if you spend a lot of time on 4chan, but I'm pretty sure you see how a place where letting your gender slip is an invitation to attack isn't a place of equality, right? And you're right, functionally a "hivemind" isn't really different than a swarm of pseudonymous posters in terms of dogpiling wrong opinions or trumpeting correct ones. Honestly I suggest you look for places related to whatever hobbies you like that are explicitly welcoming of women and minorities, try posting there and see if you notice a difference. The reason some sites have to label themselves like that isn't to scare off men or score political points, it's to make it clear people don't have to walk on eggshells while implicitly acting like white guys. That promotes more equal footing than the "don't take off the white guy (guy fawkes) mask or you'll get dogpiled" model. Though of course that requires some level of moderation and poster accountability. Sharkie fucked around with this message at 05:48 on May 15, 2015 |
|
#
¿
May 15, 2015 05:45
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:I think the reason 4chan is looked down upon on SA as it was literally created to be the exact opposite of SA in every way. The site itself is a reaction to the popularity of named account forums that were popular in the 2000's. Personally I look down on places full of neo-nazis and misogynists but I can only speak for myself. And yes, yes, SA has lovely people on it but at least there's accountability and saying it's anywhere as bad as most chans is silly.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2015 06:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:54 |
|
|
Venom Snake posted:It's not as bad here as we police those kinds of people out of the community, on 4chan they just don't give a poo poo. The reason 4chan is so harmful is because it could not give a single poo poo about anyone. You know that gamer terrorist episode from the Special Victims unit? /v/ loves it specifically because it gives /v/ attention and they couldn't care less about people attacking them, the circus and drama is what they desire, they don't care about the animals or people involved in making it happen. Right, that's what I meant about accountability. rudatron posted:I feel like you could make a better place than reddit/4chan if you could limit the ability of small, dedicated groups to brigade/drive discussion in the direction they want. The reality is the existence of people like /pol/ posters, and the willingness of those members to project their misanthropic abrasiveness everywhere else, is what drives bald-faced racism to be socially acceptable on 4chan. And don't say 'it just ironic', it's not, ironic racism is possible to do but is distinguishable from actual racism to people with a brain, you're not fooling anyone.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2015 06:56
|
|