/lit/ - Literature

>>17288601
why does no one on /s/ actually fuck sexy, beautiful women?

I'm on my 3rd book this year already. The /lit/erati that actually read are reading atm instead of replying to shitty off-topic threads so its free rein for retards to post their garbage.

>>17288601
The image in OP could actually be good if whoever made it wasn't obsessed with RW cringe. It's as if they think the deline of lit is just right wing people having opinions. OHHH dude fashcore these guys are cringe, yes this is true now go read some of the marxist threads on here to find some of the least educated cringy teens on the planet.
Just have the middle of pic be same and put your fav RW cringe on right, left wing cringe on left and throw in trap thread and shit like than in the middle top and bottom. Easy.

>>17288694
Anyway this poster did a good job. Though there is something to large sections of 4chans hobby boards not actually knowing anything/ being any good at the hobby the board's about.

because most posters are quite simply pieces of shit . i think it's anywhere from 60 to 80% pieces of shit posting

>>17288601
I read books. I read over 50 last year.

The great 4chan demographic shift of 2016

man, most of those threads at least make me laugh. the thinly veiled /pol/threads and coomer pics with "books for this feel" are what's killing me

>>17288908
The anti-SJW movement was a mistake.

>>17288801
it is not actually. a small minority of shitposters is making a majority of the garbage threads. mods could clean this place up very easily if they tried.

>>17288937
Yeah but what did you expect to happen

>>17288908
I hate this image, I was /pol/ since 2014 the place was dead as fuck until the summer before the 2016 election

>>17288976
True desu.
You could actually learn shit back then, now it's a complete shitshow

>>17288601
I'll be the first to admit that I'm not as well-read as I'd like to be. I read 20 books last year and I only do about 20-50 pages a day if I read at all. the fact that I'm not constantly getting BTFO means one of two things:

1. I',m a genius who has managed to gain a comprehensive understanding of philosophy, politics, psychology, etc merely by reading a small fraction of the canon and watching a bunch of youtube videos and browsing /lit/.

2. almost everyone on /lit/ is as poorly read as I am.

I don't think the overall quality of the board is best measured by the quality of the catalog at any given moment—the mere existence of /pol/ and /r9k/ threads aren't much of a problem, and getting upset over them is pointless when they're easily ignored. I've always thought a better indication of quality is the level of discussion you can have in actual on topic threads, and /lit/ has generally fared well in that regard despite the many negative trends in recent years. You don't need 150 threads that interest you for the place to be worthwhile; three or so threads that interest you at any given time is more than enough to make the board 'good' in my opinion, so long as there is some decent discussion in them.
Thus the problem isn't so much that bad threads are on the catalog, as i don't think that terribly impacts the quality of discussion. The problem currently is the sheer volume of threads that are being made due to the great covid influx. Which, in combination with the futuba-style limited and self-deleting catalog, has started to impact the decent on-topic threads by pushing them off the board far too quickly. /lit/ is uniquely unsuited to a fast-paced board due to the nature of medium: Literature is both incredibly varied and takes a significant time investment, which naturally results in a widely distributed userbase with limited overlap.
If we think of it in terms of sets, there is a set of all /lit/ users, and within that set a series of subsets which can talk about specific books. We can then say that within those subsets, there is a subset of people who are on /lit/ at a specific time. Naturally, the more members who have read a book, the higher the probability of discussion of that book occurring. So the factors that effect the discussion of a book (its probability) are the number of people who have read the book (the members of the initial subset), or the amount of time that the thread is on the board (how many members of that subset may be exposed to it). I don't think the former has changed that much, but the latter certainly has. When things were slower, more members of that subset would be exposed to the thread, and thus engagement more common. But with threads dying in two hours or so now, an ever smaller subset of people are able to engage in these threads. And with /lit/'s scattered distribution, it is becoming outright impossible to start and carry on a quality discussion. Which is also why those threads which do not require reference to specific books dominate: they can leverage the entire set of /lit/ at any given time, and their constant engagement keeps them up for longer giving them greater exposure.
In essence, the problem of low-traffic forums and chans—that there aren't enough users to start decent conversations—is repeating itself here but through an overabundance of posters. It isn't the composition, but the volume. Which is why i think we should split the board, if only to cull posting rate.

>>17288601
/lit/'s actually unique in this. You'd have to be willfully ignorant to think no one on /mu/ listens to music. Same for other boards and their interests.
>>17290072
Good post. We need a separate board for religion and philosophy, and an enforcement of existing rules for /pol/ threads.

>>17288792
I'm the anon who made the image and I'm more sympathetic to the right than to the left. I tried to include left wing cringe (see the anti-Christian thread on the bottom) but at the time I honestly had nothing to choose from, I mean literally the catalogue was full of that shit and nothing else. I'm surprised /lit/ has recovered. It was truly terrible for a bit.

>>17290367
I'd just like to let you know that i always appreciated the "Spergler" edit.

>>17290385
thanks anon it's what I'm most proud of in that image. I hope people don't mistake it for an attack on spengler himself

>he thinks because he doesn't read or play games or watch movies or listen to music or shoot guns or go shopping or invest money that none of us do

>>17290367
also great work

>>17288792
>t. guy who posted asking if anyone has unironically read Marx

>>17290072
The /his/ split didn't work and a /phil/ split won't work

>>17288937
it was reactionary and could not be prevented

>>17288908
anyone got the eternal summer/september gif of this image?

>>17288601
people read but dont post

Unless you're reading a /lit/ favorite nobody will reply to your posts about what you're reading

>>17288601
Because 4chan is more interesting for them.

>>17288792
good post, the partisan nature of the pic takes a lot of its teeth out of it

>>17291023
see >>17290367

>>17290419
he's right about /tv/ and that nobody there is watching anything, with the exception of an occasional rewatch of some classic for the umpteenth time
/v/ does have a lot of lively on-topic discussion going on even if the other half of the catalog is jaded faggots that don't play anything and /b/-lite offtopic threads

>>17291112
I always make threads about the movies I watch on /tv/. like pretty much every time I watch a movie I make a thread about it after

>>17288601
>Will cherry pick all the bad posts by retards
Good job mate

>>17291112
i am a /tv/ homeboarder and i have not watched movies or tv in years, i fucking spit on movies and tv, hollywood is a cancerous tumor full of pedophiles and demented narcissistic junkies and it will eventually be destroyed by god but i do like /tv/'s funposting and harassing women and sometimes dubs threads

the worst most retarded faggots on /tv/ are the ones who actually "watch shows." like they watch GAME OF THRONES or THE MANDALORIAN and then try to talk about it hahahahaha what's there to fucking talk about you dumb piece of shit? holy fuck who could actually watch that childish dreck, i would have a panic attack from the lack of mental stimulation and all the bad directing and acting choices and actors misreading their lines because it's a hollywood production: nobody's at the reins, every project is too big to fail, and everyone's just happy to be working. you really want to watch something that was produced by that satanic machine? a big jewish machine that prints money for investors, grovels to the chinese (who cant follow a narrative, thus making narrative cohesion irrelevant and naturally selecting it out of the production process) and functions as a pyramid scheme for its pointless employees?

i seriously can't imagine it, watching the fucking "MANDALORIAN" and trying to have real thoughts about it. you are being RAPED if you watch that SHIT. a table full of fat fucking interns and stupid rentseeking women is creating a turd for you to eat and you are waiting for it to arrive in your bugman netflix and appreciatively consuming it. you are being DIRECTLY RAPED by the big round table of worthless hacks who can't write, SSRI/sleeping pill taking mental retards whose daddies paid for them to go to reed college so they could "network" and somehow tumble into a writing role in the least meritocratic industry in human history, FUCK hollywood, i hope a fucking meteor wipes it off the face of the earth right now and i will still post on /tv/ every day

>>17288937
it was necessary

>>17288601
I read a little bit. Last year I read a couple dostoevsky books, right now I'm starting the Bible

>>17291170
>the worst most retarded faggots on /tv/ are the ones who actually "watch shows." like they watch GAME OF THRONES or THE MANDALORIAN and then try to talk about it
I feel the same way, but those threads act as a containment place for the normalfags, so it's not ALL bad. A lot of them don't ever go outside of generals and have no impact on board culture.

It's kinda similar to /int/: the board overall is decent until you go inside a general, which 9 times out of 10 is a mouth-breather central filled with namefags and circlejerking and might as well be a subreddit without upvotes.

>>17291220
Generals killed /int/, I used to love that board. Fucking glorified reddit now, you're right.

>>17291170
Fantastic post.

>>17288601
thats all you on the image desu
you dont read anything either, you just pretend to understand and have read spengler so that you can make posts about how spengler isnt a fascist?
it that it? your small lefrist brain cant accept that different people exist?

>>17288664
I think my gf is sexy and beautiful

>>17288664
I do.

>>17288945
for free right?

>>17288601
Lack of moderation makes media boards welcoming to newfags looking for a starting point
Say what you want about /a/ but the fact that they don't allow for rec threads weeds out a lot of newcomers that would just clutter the catalog without adding anything to discussions (also they have a pre-existing meme culture that does not allow for recent cancerous trends like wojaks)
/lit/ shoots itself in the foot with the whole start with the Greeks and the meme trilogy. Instead of trolling and filtering newfags it just makes them drop reading as a serious endeavour but does push them away
Also I'm fairly sure this board has been the target of occasional raids by leftypol that see this place as a starting point to push back against /pol/, which only ended up making things worse
We have it better than /v/ and /tv/ which are just /b/ nowadays. My guess is it has to do with the fact that reading as an hobby takes more time

>>17291280
>occasional raids by leftypol that see this place as a starting point to push back against /pol/, which only ended up making things worse
no shit
you'd think leftypol would understand dialectic

>>17288601
reading is for cucks, just watch youtube videos

>>17291289
>mfw a /leftypol/fag tries to convert me to homo nice guy futurism (communism)
https://vocaroo.com/1dnjxWNNQc25

>>17288601
Why is everyone on /r9k/ a 6'2" chad with a harem of virgin, boyfriend-free girls?

>>17288601
/tv/ is so shit that there needs to be a general to discuss actual films (no Star Wars and capeshit).

>>17288937
no

>>17291023
nah youre just a pussy bitch.

>>17288908
I agree with this image. Phone posters are the death of any forum.

>>17291532
If phones can be detected to divert them to mobile sites, shouldn't it also be possible to detect and ban them?

anyone else noticed that the generic "discuss x that doesn't exist" or "3x3 of you favorite y" has switched from author or writer to philosopher or thinker?

>>17291170
Rarely do I relate so strongly to a post.
Bless you, brother.

>>17290072
good post. board used to be way slower and it was better

So I should leave /lit/?
If I want to get myself to actually read books for once?