/lit/ - Literature

>>6365588
Proving someone wrong is boring and long, needs immense efforts.

Ridiculing him works just fine.

There's plenty of substantial things left to be said, though one should never expect to say them anywhere on the chans and remain untipped.

>>6365588
if you wear the funny hat you are the one who is wrong.

>>6365588
>the only things with real substance are edgy

>>6365598
>>6365600

epic meta-memeing my friends

this thread has been approved by the boss of dank memes keep up the good work gentleman

>>6365615
>I have transcended memes, let me convey this through sarcasm

>>6365634
>I have transcended memes as well, let me use them to further ridicule you

Don't really see it on /lit/, to be honest. But sometimes, easpecially on religious discussions the "atheist" side will throw out those dull dawkins-arguments that you have argued a thousand times against and now are too boring to write something up for.

>>6365663
>and now are too boring to write something up for
oh ho

>>6365676
You know, this shit like "you only believe in one god less", or "the flying spaghetti monster", or "science is the default truth" that come straight out of some unwritten list of "101 arguments in a debate against fundies".

People have gotten so deep into these tracks of thought that even just talking to them feels like walking down a flowchart.

>>6365676
>>6365690
Oh, and my favourite: copypasta of funny things that the bible says you cannot do (sourced from some proestant translation of the text) which I'll just dump into any thread.

>>6365690
The funny thing is I don't even know which side it is you're talking about here

>>6365595
Nice edge, fedora lord bro.

>>6365663

No, it's really both sides that fling the shit. Despite that, however, the threads generally (and amazingly) tend to stay on topic.

>>6365694
>>6365690
>>6365663

All of this is nonsense.

Why even bother getting into those arguments when you already know what the opposition will say in the first place?

How about just avoiding that argument altogether and closing the tab instead of shitposting and getting imaginary upvotes for your epic witticism?

If you're frustrated to argue with cardboard cut-outs of the same people you've argument with before endlessly then maybe it's time to stop posting.

>>6365707
Neither side tbh (though technically I don't believe in god). I'm just remarking that the religious posts on here often have much more depth than their atheistic counterparts, which on occasion tend to dissolve into God-dillusion anti-fundie babble.

>>6365725
Of course one does need to sound much more reasonable when standing on such grounds

Make the sage function visible.

It serves the implicit function of marking the content and topic of a thread according to its relevance within the culture of all boards and their general unspoken rules.

It's a permanent feature with a fluid degree of usage, leaving posters able to respond to its use and interpret accordingly.

>>6365725
They don't have more depth, you're just not used to seeing them made as often.