/lit/ - Literature

>>13135984
>good, high-quality content gets deleted
any examples of that

>>13135986
the infinite jest t-shirt thread

>>13136009

>>13135984
Yeah, get banned for discussing Steven Pinker's ideas but a thread on rationalwiki is allowed.
Do they not log these bans and changes? Or is it just glowmods?

Got a temp ban for starting a thread asking about literature on Chernobyl. There's obviously a rogue mod who's pathetic life has led him to be a bit "power hungry"

>>13135986
My thread about Carlo Michelstaedter.

>>13136540
they don't share those
spergs with little agendas mostly
other sites are much worse with astroturfing

>>13136561
Which one was that? Fuck I hate /lit/ jannies

>>13136540
I've seen three threads critical of Jordan Peterson in the last two days disappear down the memory hole after just a couple of hours on the front page. Some mod is probably getting paid by CAA to make them disappear.

>>13135984
There was a very nice high-quality thread about morality without God, which delved into Kant and other philosophy, that got moved to /his/ by someone who clearly couldn't give two shits about quality, judging from this:

https://desuarchive.org/his/thread/6600049/#6600128

>>13135984
There was a thread talking about lgbtq literature that got straight up deleted even though we were talking about actual literature and it wasn't a troll thread

>>13135984
why the fuck is that thread still up holy fucking shit

>>13135984
Lmao

Mods and jannies ruined this board

>>13135986
3d about the public masturbator just got deleted

>>13135984
>that faggot """"chad""""'s AMA is still up with 100+ replies
That chad thread does contain a lot of discussion about literature, more so than any of the threads people complain about in this one.

>>13136557
Technically /lit/ is a blue board, and NSFW content includes things like the pic you posted in the OP.

>>13136540
>>13136683
I don't the exact threads you are referring to, but I see threads like that all the time, they aren't discussing literature, just shitposters trying to troll with people that happened to have written books.

>>13136561
If it was this one https://archived.moe/lit/thread/13127112/#13127112 then do I even need to explain that that is not a quality thread in any way?

>>13136894
I skimmed through the thread, almost no actual mentions or references to literature. While that post is on the edge, the sticky does state that philosophy can go in both /his/ and /lit/, and that thread didn't discuss literature much, so I don't blame it for being moved to /his/ where it is more on topic.

>>13136905
link?


tl;dr you are all whiny faggots who can't follow the rules or read the sticky, or just too stupid to know what quality content is, the jannies did nothing wrong

>>13137369
>grown men who care this much about internet rules

What the fuck is wrong with Americans? Wannabe jannies can get a fucking bullet

>>13135984
>t. chode who should be dead

>>13137369
it got pruned retard nice try

>>13135984
>>13135986
There was a /lit/ career thread that was really productive about a week ago that the jannies trashed rather than archived.
There was a productive Ted thread with some in depth conversation that was deleted around the same time.
>there are about 3 /r9k/ posts right now that have nothing to do with literature
>shitposts with tons of replies get preference over community building, productive posts regarding literature or philosophy
Those are the most recent examples I can think of but it's starting to turn me away from this board. This place is starting to look more like r9k than lit. Theres still some good threads in the shit pile (such as the Kant thread right now), but it disgusts me that these are actively selected against. Even these good threads are only made good by a few knowledgeable people before they're subverted by the /pol/tards and /r9k/fags (which exist because the jannies allow it). Fuck jannies.

>>13137744
I won't lie, when metaphysics/Ted/accel threads get deleted, I think there's a clear agenda

Ah yes, the brainlet retorts start, I've been waiting.

>>13137597
I don't care about the internet rules specifically, I'm just pointing out that the reason these threads got pruned are because they violated the rules of this site and board. Which are not the rules of the internet, mind you.

Without these rules /lit/ would just be another /b/, there would be no point to have a separate board.

But let's make it about me. Discredit my motives motives, not my points. Call me an autist, an American, a wannabe jannie.

What's your point? You don't like me? Why are you even posting that? Why do you care enough about what I care about to post about it, just like I did?

>>13137718
I assume you are talking about the chad thread. I was trying to guess why it stayed up but the other threads got pruned. The only noticeable difference was the content of the thread referencing and talking about books and authors a lot, more so than the other threads posted here, hence why I figured since despite the shitty OP of that thread, the content is still on topic.

It got pruned a few minutes after I made my post and to be honest I'm glad, I didn't like the OP of that thread.

>>13137744
>career thread
I have to agree, that thread doesn't seem like it needed to be deleted.
>productive Ted thread
There are too many Ted threads for to sift through to find that one, but since I agree with you on the career thread I'm going to assume it was good. If you can link it I'd like to have a look.
>/pol/ and /r9k/ posts
They pop up all the time, jannies don't seem to be active all the time, when they are asleep these threads stay around long enough to be noticed en masse. When I knew jannies were active I have seen these threads go down within minutes of being posted.

Honestly, I just think there aren't enough jannies, /lit/ seems a lot more active than when I first started lurking here, and with the high workload they have to deal with they might sometimes prune all threads that look the same, like that Ted thread you mentioned.

Still, if you hate the jannies so much, imagine this board without them.

I find the more frogosts in the catalog, the better /lit/ as a whole is.

>>13137883
imagine reading this post or actually engaging this fucking retard

>>13137883
ass kissing faggot

>>13135986
All the delicious and ice cold Coca-Cola® posting

>>13137944
>>13137950
I'd love to see your next round. My body is ready.

>>13137944
>>13137950
Nothing? It only took you 13 minutes to respond to >>13137998 last time, you've had 2 hours to come up with something better than those banal memetic ad hominems. Where's your spunk now?

Maybe you've just realized you've been shooting blanks all this time and have given up. I could be wrong though, so please, prove me wrong. Or are you like pic related, all bark and no bite.

>>13138500
Quoted wrong post, >>13137998 should be >>13137883

I hereby invoke the "one meta thread per board" rule in order to bump this thread.

Also waiting on these guys to respond
>>13137944
>>13137950

Why yes, I don't have a life, how could you tell?

>>13135984
WHY THE FUCK IS THAT RETARDED EVOLUTION THREAD STILL UP HOLY SHIT FUCK THE JANNIES

>>13139747
You should read the whole thread before replying to the OP directly.

As pointed out here >>13137883 jannies aren't always active or online, but when they are online they do prune threads rather quickly. Just report that thread and wait.