/lit/ - Literature

>>12020578
catalog. each thread is a chapter in the book that is /lit/

>>12020582
catalog is for plebs

>>12020605
You idiots will argue about anything.

>>12020621
The catalogue lets you cherry pick the threads that appeal to you, which polarises discussion and makes every thread into a massive circle jerk

>>12020578
Catalogue, and on my phone

>>12020690
>phoneposters

>>12020711
>tfw browsing /lit/ whilst watching the game on tv
Raiders are deceptively bad this year btw

>>12020578
/lit/ is a legitimate text. Anything written is a legitimate text. I use paged mode primarily, but sometimes use the catalogue.

>>12020578
phoneposter using clover, it's called "board mode" in it
>>12020630
why would i go out of my way to discuss things i'm not interested in (and thus not passionate about enough to be serious) or about which i know i've nothing of worth to contribute (yet, if ever)? noting very importantly that i like tension, a shared interest isn't a shared judgement necessarily (and often isn't). also, in my experience, people that go out of their way to comment on, say, a faulkner thread when they don't like faulkner or haven't read him often only call him a hack (or an equivalent) or shitpost. i'd like to note too that what you're saying is simply a lie, because all threads i've bookmarked right now have discussion, or at least "dissident opinions" (where the dissent is from op's implied bias, they aren't a minority or anything), and they spawned very soon, except where it's of little relevance (like that verbal iq test thread or here, where if you hadn't been called out for gratuitously berating other's choices and thus gained a chance to explain yourself you would've started and ended with a shitpost: "catalog is for plebs"). i shitpost too, when bored or tired, but they're often harmless and rightly ignored posts. now, if you want constant quality discussion, i'd like to remind you that you're /here/, which should be self-explanatory, something i've learnt too and never stops being annoying. in short your post sucks and you're nan be gay
hope you read this

>>12020630
Yes anon. That's what this whole site works. You pick out the boards that appeal to you, so you can then find threads that appeal to you. Why would you go a specific thread that you had no interest in? What is wrong with you?

>it's after 3am
>he takes the apple from the basket

>>12020849
tldr

>>12020630
jokes on you, I specifically go into threads that make me angry and are on topics that I hate

>>12021029
>>12020877

>>12020849
Imagine typing this out

>>12020578
both

>>12021254
idk thought it was worth it

>>12021254
but really, is it cringy? i know it's tedious but i wanted to be exhaustive to avoid gotcha retorts

>>12021299
It's handy pasta, good job

>>12020578
Catalog. It's much easier to see and avoid the vast majority of threads here

>>12020849
I read it OP. Though I mainly lurk other than /Bible/ threads and don't really understand anything you said, I still read it.

But using the catalog kinda messes with the board culture. It used to be that you saw a few replies from threads, even if you weren't interested in them, but now you're only exposed to the OP posts and the threads you open when you use the catalog. By making it easier to hide stuff you don't want to see, the board culture is less consistent across threads.

catalog, just like reading a magazine:

when i buy a magazine like the Economist or the NYMag, i first separate all the pages by articles and lay them out in a grid. then i look from a bird's eye which articles are most interesting, which are just eyecandy bait, and which are outraging. then i read and make handwritten comments on the margins of the article then i send the broken up and commented magazine back to its publisher, and wait for replies to my comments

>>12022413

>>12020578
Anime?

>>12021039
most believable post itt