/lit/ - Literature

>>16284160
also religion board

How many more users must /v/ have had to get five boards or whatever?

>>16284160
>>16284173
No. Why would you guys want to create a bunch of even slower boards?

If anything /lit/ and /his/ should be merged.

Lit has one post every 5 hours, you want to divide it?

>>16284160
genuinely useful suggestion
i.e. they probably won't act on it

>>16284557
I sense hyperbole

>>16284160
Alternatively, ban all ‘books for this feel’, Twitter screenshots threads, etc.

>>16284160
you would kill both boards by splitting them. /lit/ is unpopular already

>>16284554
>If anything /lit/ and /his/ should be merged.
not today satan. have you seen /his/? i agree we shouldnt separate boards much more, but dont combine with /his/

>>16284583
It's popular with me :)

>>16284569
>Alternatively, ban all ‘books for this feel’, Twitter screenshots threads, etc.
i literally just made a jannie application for the sole purpose of telling them to get rid of threads like that

>>16284554
lay of the dopamine newfag. /lit/ is already triple the speed it should be

>>16284587
It’s crazy to me that a thread can be deleted for discussing a philosopher rather than a specific book by that philosopher, but some inane conversation over some 2000-follower podcaster gets 200 replies.

>>16284612
This. If we are to have quality control then we need proper fucking quality. Maybe we could have a resident shitposting general to contain the overt nonsense posting.

>>16284554
Hell no, /lit/ is fast enough and merging with /his/ would ruin the board beyond repair.

>>16284583
I think a slow board is the preferable option. I’d be happy with only ten threads a day if this could somehow prevent the posting of the pointless political threads that are at the top of the page all day.

>>16284160
A religion & philosophy board would be great.
Mind you discussions about a particular book that might be philosophical or religious could still be hosted here but still those boards would be very much appreciated. The people going on about how slow /lit/ already is are just ridiculous, it's faster than ever and too fast for it's own good unless you want a hyperboard like /pol/ in which case please leave.

although what the whole website needs is an e-celeb/online personality board, it would drastically improve the quality of all the top ten boards and would also be a popular outlet

>>16284554
A religious board would go at fucking lightspeed due to all the christcuck / fedora posting not to mention all the tourists

>>16284554
Creating new boards and subdividing topics means only genuine aficionados will use it. Believe it or not there are relatively untrolled, quiet corners of this website where people discuss their interests. Ever been to /gd/? Or /qst/? I didn't even know they existed. /lit/ is the de facto philosophy board even though it isn't where it strictly belongs. And the posting here is marginally better than /his/ , which while both being about history and humanities, is completely about history and even more heavily infiltrated by poltards than /lit/. For these reasons I support the creation of a /phi/

ATTENTION ALL COMPLAINERS
Here is the situation:
>Mods only intervene in their pet boards; no mods cares about /lit/. There will be no intervention on their behalf
>Jannie is either AWOL or too illiterate to tell what is and isn't /lit/ related. There will be either no intervention or poor intervention on their behalf
Taking these two premises together, in addition to a simple grounding claim:
>the enforcement of rules is grounded in the intervention of mods or jannies
we can formulate a simple argument:
>(1): for a rule to be effective, it must be enforced
>(2): the enforcement of rules is grounded in the intervention of mods or jannies
>(3): there will be no intervention from mods or jannies
>(4): no rule will ever be enforced
>(C): Any proposed rules will never be effective
or as tommy hobbes would say
>"covenants, without the sword, are but words"
Now that you know the situation, an insight derived:
>any change in /lit/ must come from a source other than enforced rules
That means any change in /lit/ must come from changes in the action and behaviour of anons—that's right, you and me.
PROPOSAL:
we discuss what is in each anons power to make the board better, and what factors prevent it being so; so there may be thought a way to overcome them, without appeals to moderation

>>16284554
>If anything /lit/ and /his/ should be merged.
/his/ was created as an offshoot of /lit/ so that all the navel gazers and religitards could have a place to talk about their shit and leave us in peace. not our fault they didn't bother to do it

>>16284676
Imagine a world where every board has an e-celeb variant. So you have /lit/ and /e-lit/, /a/ and /e-a/ and so on. Would vastly improve the whole website.

Agreed. Why the fuck did admins create unnecessary video game boards when we need a philosophy and religion board.

>>16284782
Perhaps we could petition Emperor Hiroshima? He has absolute authority.

>>16284873
Tis a myth that Hiroshima Nagasaki rules this place; he cares nothing for the realm but only wishes to live corpulently off its proceeds. The true rulers are his lieutenants—the moderati. And they hold the people of the land in contempt. That is why, if there is to be change, it must be by our hands.

>>16284782
>this is a guerilla war and we're on our own
It is what it is.
>we discuss what is in each anons power to make the board better, and what factors prevent it being so; so there may be thought a way to overcome them, without appeals to moderation
Solid. I motion that everyone (ofc including me) combats the incessant pride that drives one to take trollbaits. In practice we would just have to ignore the retards, but of course that is easier said than done. Now, simply calling them retards might not do the trick as they feed off that triggered-energy. I think our best bet, apart from taking this seriously, is to read read read and write write write so that we can btfo retards easily, and ignore inflammatory insincere posts.

Care, is what this board needs. Who if not (you), anon ?

>>16284554
>waaah waaaah my dopamine hits aren’t fast enough
/lit/ should be slower. Go back to /tv/ and /v/, fucking zoomer faggot

>>16284160
>he thinks jannies actually browse this place outside of just reports

>>16285054
>he posts s o y without any shame

>>16285065
>he is ashamed of onions

>>16285081
>he willfully contributes to the death of the intellect and prides himself on being a last man
Yeah alright, you're a chad. Whatever

>>16284957
There are actually two approaches to trolls: one, as you said, is to ignore them; the other is to derail their threads. When you think about it, there is one way for users to get a thread removed from the board: get it to the bump limit. This works better on faster boards, but it could help expedite an already popular thread to the archive.
But without cooperation, how could these threads be derailed or bump-limitef? We may here turn to Adam Smith
>It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities, but of their advantages.
You may not be able to convince anons of the importance of not replying, but you could appeal to their self-love and make them want to derail it. How? Simple: roll images, "die in her sleep" images, the /sci/ question macros—people reply to these in droves out of their own self interest.
It is an option, but perhaps not always the best for a board like /lit/.

>>16285086
Are you suggesting we bait them into containment threads which we deliberately derail to eventually get them to quit by showing them their own debasedness? Delightfully devilish

>>16284160
This is an absolutely based idea

No one forces you to come to 4chan, no one forces you to come to /lit/. If you don't like this board you can just leave
>b-b-but I like it it's just the shitposters that ruin it
this website is a place that mixes shitposting culture with discussion of literature. There are plenty of other websites that are heavily moderated and allow for no shitposting, no wojaks, no brainlets, no anime. Go there.
>b-b-but I don't mind the shitposters it's just the /pol/tards that ruin it
This is when we reach the crux of the matter really. Again, this website's culture is based on its low moderation for themes that are polemical, there are plenty of spaces that are heavily moderated and don't allow for iliberal political discussion. You can always go there. Yet I know you won't, because as per usual, these types of inane threads have nothing to do with too much spam or shitposting, they are about destroying boards that you find to be too "contaminated" with an illiberal worldview. You can autisticaly flail your arms all day, nothing will change the fact that if left unmoderated and heavily repressed, people will display all manner of mysoginistic, racialist, fascistic attitudes - because these views are widely popular. Again, you don't need to post here, you don't need to even open any /pol/tard thread, you don't need to click any thumbnail you don't want, you don't need any of this. I don't think your complaints are made in good faith, I think they are made because of your personal resentment that this website allows for people that disagree with you to have a voice. You have reddit. You could go post there. Yet you don't. You seem to HAVE to penetrate this space. Why is that? Why do you NEED to come back again and again? Can't you join like minded people in your own discord? Or maybe in one of the many websites that are reserved for literary discussion? Have you checked those?

I don't think you care for this board, I think you just want to destroy it by splitting it. That is actually stupid btw, because as we all know, any board will eventually be taken over by illiberal politics because they are popular
>Inb4 HURR I'M NOT EVEN LEFTIST WHY DO YOU HAVE TO BRING POLITICS
don't be disingenious, don't decontextualize things, we all know how the world, and the internet, is at the current year. Don't try to pretend you are the last objective voice who wants to dedicate yourself to a hobby, nobody here is stupid we can all see right through you

>>16284928
What can one do in the face of such brutal oppression? Hirohito has clearly lost the Mandate of Heaven, and his minions are drunk on power and deaf to the cries of the people.

>>16284160
Most people interested in literature are also interested in philosophy and religion so it doesn't really make sense to split it up. I get all of the things I'm interested in on one board and I don't want to change that.

>>16284989
>Go back to /tv/ and /v/, fucking zoomer faggot
those boards are too slow for me. Guess which board I frequent?

>>16285270
Then click on the links to the other boards.
Jesus fucking Christ

>>16285270
>Most people interested in literature are also interested in philosophy and religion
no they're not

>>16284554
/his/ is full of retards who argue in bad faith, this board has the best conversation ethics of any board, even with the occasional supporting.

>>16285515
*shitposting*

Fucking autocorrect

>>16284740
amen

>>16284928
Mods are fags and the only thing a jannie can do is go whine at them in hopes that they take action.

>create a philosophy and theology board
>merge what's left of /lit/ into /tv/
Enjoy your Harry Potter generals.

>>16284554
Slow is good. So stfu

>>16284852
Someone else said it's so they can have advertisers on boards for the specific thing they're advertising, like mobile games. I don't think there are any advertisers trying to get /lit/ demographic

Go to 8/philosophy and never come back

>>16284676
This, I was recently thinking about how this would work out, it wouldn't be able to totally remove E-celebs from every board as some are essential to board culture like Zyzz, Rich Piana, Scooby or Rippetoe on /fit/ where they mostly take the form of memes which greatly enhance the board. But generally an E-celeb board would clear up half of the E-celeb trash on each board and with places like /pol/, it could definitely use it.

>>16284676
I think they probably are afraid an eceleb board would turn into a sort harrassment campaign hub

>>16284587
As jannie you have to keep board from off-topic threads but also make sure there are lots of replies. If you succeed at latter we hit a threshold to get phirel I believe.

>>16285210
>nothing will change the fact that if left unmoderated and heavily repressed, people will display all manner of mysoginistic, racialist, fascistic attitudes - because these views are widely popular
yeah popular among the uneducated, the unrefined, unintelligent, the narrow-minded, proles. it makes sense for other boards centered on popular topics, not for a literature board
>nobody here is stupid we can all see right through you
speak for yourself and no one else retard. I'm not the anon you replied to. there might be a couple right wing retards here that share your view, but dont pretend that historically you've got the majority on this board. in my opinion, it's the likes of you that are destroying this board

>>16286216
You can find enormous quantities of /pol/ tier views in literature, especially if you go back a bit more than a century

>>16286231
you say that like it means absolutely anything. right wing views are characterized by their antiquatedness. try again

>>16284583
>/lit/ is unpopular already
this is a good thing. the last thing this board needs is another influx of r*dditors.

>>16286251
It means that for the majority of the history of literature these views were taken seriously and it has just been a rather short period in which they were not. /lit/ trends to older literature anyway, so it would be bizarre to consider all these men to have just been entirely wrong and ignorant, if they are worth studying.

it is very hard to learn much about history and read these people and retain the narrow view of political reality that you seem to have.

>>16286266
>would be bizarre to consider all these men to have just been entirely wrong and ignorant, if they are worth studying
the thing is, the material conditions of the present are so unlike anything that has ever existed before. you cannot ignore context. I'm sure "all these men" have valuable contributions, but you have to recognize they existed in a different time with different material conditions. Not once did I imply that the greats were ignorant and completely wrong

>it is very hard to learn much about history and read these people and retain the narrow view of political reality that you seem to have.
listen, I've not once espoused a particular political ideology in this conversation so fuck off with whatever strawman of me you've got in your head. my only argument is that retards spamming Ted Kaczynski, Evola, the Turner Diaries, "recommend good fascist literature," etc are detracting from from the quality of this board. these are not people interested in literature, they are ideologues who are only concerned with backing up their politics with appeals to authorities that represent their politics.

>>16285409
this: I don’t care about philosophy beyond what my favorite writers thought about it. Right now I’m working through the presocratics and Kant because Beckett said they were hot shit, not because I necessarily want to. As for religion, I have my own personal hangups and I’m trying to grind through the OT to see if it’ll jog anything from my catholic upbringing.

>>16284842
Just create an e-4chan and e-4channel at this point

>>16286216
>all these great authors of the western canon are uneducated, the unrefined, unintelligent, the narrow-minded, proles because we are in current year + five so I need to signal virtue at all times lest I'm the first man to stop clapping for Stalin

>>16286698
funny you do exactly what I said you would
>I'VE NOT ONCE ESPOUSED A PARTICULAR POLITICAL IDEOLOGY IN THIS CONVERSATION OH NO NOT ME I'M A NEUTRAL AGENT I SEE LIFE THROUGH A REFINED OBJECTIVE BIG BRAINED LENS SO ME??? WHY I'D NEVER
no one here is stupid, so why even try it bro. Don't be disingenuous, we can see right through you. Maybe in 2009 or even in 2012 I'd have believed you. But we all know what world we are living right now, nobody here is a moron, we know. You know the funniest part is that I can't even see the problem here. If there was to be an influx of lefty refugees to this board I'd love it, sparring partners, more room for discussion with the opposition, if anything that is fun. But like, your default is "MODS MODS YOU NEED TO DESTROY THIS", you need to be the kid taking the ball home because the other team gets to score too. Dude if you get confronted with /pol/tards how about you use it as a chance to hone your skill?

>>16286698
Those threads are much closer to literature and usually there's actual discussion in them. Much better than the million of "books for this feel" threads we see here all the time. /pol/ isn't the cause of the problem

>>16286698
While I find Evola a bit comical I also don't care if people want to discuss his books, it really doesn't matter. I wasn't really thinking of people quite so out there as that though.

Anyway our current little window of history and its dogmas, I really doubt this is going to last, so I simply don't care much about having 'up to date beliefs'. A lot of them seem almost blatantly dumb to me for that matter, and have nothing do with our material conditions, because they're certainly not based on empirical evidence, which they in fact constantly criticize as a standard. Maybe they are based on material conditions in the sense that mass communications technologies allow for widespread brainwashing previously not possible lel.

>>16284160
>/his/ - History & Humanities
>History & Humanities
>Humanities

retard

pure incoherence
>If there was to be an influx of lefty refugees to this board I'd love it, sparring partners, more room for discussion with the opposition, if anything that is fun
if you're so desperate for the practice, go literally anywhere else online
>But like, your default is "MODS MODS YOU NEED TO DESTROY THIS"
lmao not even me, I've never even so much as reported a post or thread here. I'm just tired of retards grasping at straws, trying to find ground to stand on in order to justify incoherent worldviews produced by broken personalities. Keep trying sweetie and let me know once beating up that strawman isn't fun anymore

>>16287593
post physique and book stack

>>16287593
lol at this buttblasted nigger

Bump.

>>16287593
>justify incoherent worldviews produced by broken personalities
anon stop reading my diary, it is personal

>4channel
>intellectual
heh

>>16284160
Why don’t you guys just go to /his

Posting a Twitter screencap thread is an offense that should be punishable by death.

I just found out the term for my personal philosophy.

I'm a strong determinist, and an existence monist.