/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21416878]

How do we make /lit/ better? The current catalog is a complete travesty but everything that isn’t one of 5 beaten to death topics gets 3 (you)’s and is archived in an hour. If effortposting is discouraged and low effort trolling is encouraged, all it does is spawn more low effort threads. Can this be reversed or is it just a symptom of the times? I’ve noticed, in general, content has shifted to as short and provocative as possible in order to squeeze out interactions. I’ve seen so many good places get destroyed by this kind of thing and I don’t want it to happen to /lit/ too.

[Anonymous No.21416880]

>>21416878
Bro just chill. We're just here to pass the time till we get back to wagecucking.

[Anonymous No.21416907]

>>21416878
>Ban anime
>ban generals
>ban phoneposters
Is that easy

[Anonymous No.21416911]

>>21416878
/lit/ is getting better every day. Reddit and /pol/ immigrants will seethe, but it's the truth.

[Anonymous No.21416913]

>how do we post more to make better board?
You don't. You post less, spend less time here, and lurk moar you retarded newb and then you use all that free time to actually partake in your hobby so the only reason you have to ever post here is to reveal your devastating power level. Fuck off until you at least learn Greek.

[Anonymous No.21416917]

>>21416913
This , so much this!!

[Anonymous No.21416922]

>>21416878
Range ban Americans

[࿇ C Œ M G E N V S ࿇ !KNDY/Ar.iI No.21416924]

YES.

[Anonymous No.21416929]

>>21416922
Americans are the lifeblood of this board. If it weren't for the based Americans guiding you deluded eurofags and thirdworldistanis, there would be no /lit/. If anything, we should rangeban non-Americans.

[Anonymous No.21416930]

Read:
The Bell Curve
A Troublesome Inheritance (Only the chapter on race)
Death of the West
A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind
The uniqueness of western civilization
Culture of Critique
Paved with Good Intentions

post only when you come back

[Anonymous No.21416935]

>>21416930
>frogposter telling anyone when and how they should post

[Anonymous No.21416944]

>>21416878
You're right, and the replies in this thread are indicative of it. Unfortunately, I think it's too far gone. /pol/ threads and posts take up a lot of real estate here, and a lot of real conversation is derailed by their toxicity. Most good threads die quickly because nobody actually reads. I wish I knew where to go

[Anonymous No.21416947]

>>21416878
This is because style has been hounded out of 4chan by accusations of "being reddit". That's why everything is clipped and shouted and deliberately misinterpreted, except for easy target harangues about trannies, women, nigras, etc. They'll call it frankness, but it's a culture of cruelty.

Note the recommendations by >>21416930, and really think about what sort of environment he and his "frens" would enact -- both here, where the job's almost done, and in real life -- if given the reins.

[Anonymous No.21416964]

>>21416947
Spoken like a true faggot

[Anonymous No.21416965]

>>21416944
For reference:
>>21416253 doomer bait
>>21415720 doomer bait
>>21416667 not /lit/
>>21416386 incel bait
>>21416553 doomer bait
>>21416903 pointless bait
>>21400647 this thread again
>>21416916 at least he probably smiled when he posted this
>>21415768 yet another Nietzsche thread
>>21405949 weak bait thread that's been up all week
>>21410306 /pol/ bait
>>21414944 /pol/ bait
>>21416431 pointless
>>21416858 pointless
>>21414379 pointless AND bait
I've run out of steam. These are just the opening threads. The actual replies are much worse. The few actual /lit/ threads I passed by were weak.

[Anonymous No.21416966]

Too many people don’t read, yet want to be included in conversations. To do this, they mish mash secondary opinions of actual readers and filter it though their retarded self bias. Ask yourself, how many Spengler threads do you think were made by people who actually read Spengler? How many Nietzsche threads are just two people arguing about their own politics vaguely disguised by nitpicking his work? How many Mishima threads are just people going “Well…he’s LE GAY” and waiting for the fireworks? No genuine conversation can be had, because none of them actually read the authors in question (or at least not enough to have anything profound or unique to say). Once these secondaries have internalized their own twisted view of the author, it’s then spread to tertiaries, who understand even less and then spam basedjak threads.

[Anonymous No.21416971]

>>21416965
cope, seethe, and dilate, redditor

[Anonymous No.21416973]

>>21416971
Sorry I called out your thread

[Anonymous No.21416979]

>>21416965
>>>21416667 # not /lit/
This is probably a Campbell dog whistle for Jungians who hate Peterson memers. You're not only doing a
>Stop liking what I don't like
You're also revealing you can't turn threads like that Star Wars one into a discussion of the hero's journey like every vaguely liberal arts related major of the 1970s–2000s could. Nobody should ask your opinion on anything above high school lit is what your post actually reveals.

[Anonymous No.21417011]

>>21416907
this plus instant pruning of
>question begging OPs "just read X what did i think of Xit?"
>Jezebel OP pics
and
>one and only one goddamn Nietzsche thread in the catalogue at a time

[Anonymous No.21417013]

>>21416979
>Campbell dog whistle for Jungians who hate Peterson memers
Man what
>Stop liking what I don't like
I didn't say that
>Revealing
Bro chill. You're right that you could have that discussion, but open up that /tv/ thread and read the replies.

[Anonymous No.21417035]

>>21417013
>Man what
Yeah exactly. For people with more than a high school level of English literature understanding, the phrase "hero's journey" or even the mention of Campbell's name probably made them groan from overfamiliarity with the subject.
The reason you can't relate it to /lit/ even though the meme about Star Wars for decades was it ripped off a common English narrative theory spawned by one of the most popular Jungians is the same exact thing you're complaining about: you don't read enough either and yet here you are still posting hoping you'll be right.
You're acting like you could take part in a genuine discussion but you can't even do the basic history that freshman arts students wind up repeating in their sleep it's so well known. You don't even know enough to know how badly read in even pop culture, let alone literature, that makes you look, like you probably don't know the title of the book people who are educated above a high school English level are probably screaming internally at the screen over seeing just the thumbnail of that thread. If you're OP, stop making threads expecting people who had to read Dryden to rush to your defense like a peer.

[Anonymous No.21417049]

>>21417035
I'm not OP, but you're retarded if you think knowing about Star Wars' hero's journey basis makes you smart. You're doubly retarded if you think that's what was implied by "is star wars philosophically deep." You're triply retarded for reacting this autistically to the words "not /lit/."

[Anonymous No.21417119]

>>21417049
>f you think knowing about Star Wars' hero's journey basis makes you smart.
He's saying it makes you basic, not smart. I don't think he was counting freshmen as smart. Freshmen are never smart.

[Anonymous No.21417129]

>>21416878
We need better moderation

[Anonymous No.21417349]

>>21416878
>a symptom of the times
yup.

Although it's difficult to argue that this hasn't always been the manner of 'public speech'; consider how much time was wasted over the last 1,500 yrs on the subject of theological cretins (incels) seething at each other and calling for death and censorship.

I think of 4chan as the largest public forum in that you get a sense of what the general population is really like, without any filters. It's depressing, often, but it does provide experience.

>>21416913
>lurk moar you retarded newb and then you use all that free time to actually partake in your hobby so the only reason you have to ever post here is to reveal your devastating power level.
lol it's hilarious to think that this is the self-view of the frog-posters, trad-caths and one-liner types.

[Anonymous No.21417352]

>>21417129
censorship under the false-pretense of moderation is the problem 'of' trolling in the first place; winding up another child into hitting you so you can get them in trouble with the teacher. False-flagging, etc., is entirely that and is more or less the total impetus behind anti-social communication.

[Anonymous No.21417481]

One of the things I've been pondering is how exactly to get the benefits of imageboard culture (anonymity, freedom, spontaneous creativity & impromptu projects, high frequency of replies) while minimizing downsides (incentivized repetitive shitposting and ritualposting, derailing). Only answer I can come up with other than having good moderators is fragmenting the boards further like what was done with /v/ or 2ch, setting a minimum word limit, or having a board specifically built around bookclub threads for books. Don't think there's any way to solve the essential cancer though. You're better off curating your own set of intellectual online friends to talk to.

[Anonymous No.21417642]

>>21416878
we need identities associated with posters to weed out corrupting elements, a digital ID if you will

[Anonymous No.21417947]

>>21417352
Moderation is not censorship and if you make that claim it's clear that you haven't used the internet much before circa-2012. Moderation exists to gatekeep communities and keep a standard for discussion within that community, without moderation you will get people coming in to shit up a community which is the reason why board culture is slowly dying and being replaced by the same global 4chan culture based around baiting and making people angry.

[Anonymous No.21418002]

>>21416878
it is irremediable because the good posters are all gone. The only solution for us is to get out of here and find another literature forum, which is not yet corrupted. The problem is that it either doesn't exist or it is unknown. So idk, find people irl who read good books and are prone to have discussions about them.

>>21416913
yes. The problem is that we (or, at least, I) are here because we want to discuss the books we have read or ask something to well-read people. So read a lot only makes us have more questions and more things to say. But if we say or ask those here, we are basically ignored because the demography of /lit/ is mostly people who dont read at all. And, as I wrote above, there isn't –or it is unkwon– any other (good, meaning not worthless) forum about literature.

>>21417481
i dont like much having a severe moderation but requiring a minimun quantity of words is a good idea.

>You're better off curating your own set of intellectual online friends to talk to.
how?

[Anonymous No.21418098]

>>21418002
>but isn't 4chan meant to spoonfeed me
>also the board should take into account my views of quality control despite wanting senpai to spoonfeed me
What makes 4chan boards good is people being allowed to bully you for being retarded and for not putting the work in yourself. Nobody good on the board got good because of the board. There is no cheat code to read canon and its critics faster, not even speed reading.
>>21417349
>lol it's hilarious to think that this is the self-view of the frog-posters, trad-caths and one-liner types.
If you got btfo by one of these people because they could read Greek and then you assumed that property transferred to all such posters, you're going to be severely disappointed by your really dumb rubric within minutes.

[Anonymous No.21418122]

>>21417129
Nah. The halcyon days of /lit/ that attracted people who don't read here because they hoped they could be intellectual by association that those people want back involved zero moderation. Every increase in moderator influence has made the board worse. You're hoping the people who report shit are people who are well versed in literature, when really they're people who compulsively f5 if there's nothing shiny and well within their chosen demesne of poorly read prejudices. In the /lit/ you came here to leech off the only moderation is your self control. That /lit/ is deader than a fairy in a production of Peter Pan for thalidomide victims.

[Anonymous No.21418338]

>>21418098
>If you got btfo by one of these people because they could read Greek
i've never encountered any such persons here, hence the funniness to consider that what you said is what ever memer thinks of themselves.

>>21417947
>Moderation is not censorship and if you make that claim it's clear that you haven't used the internet much before circa-2012
uhmmm no, I grew up with the internet circa-2001;

>Moderation exists to gatekeep communities and keep a standard for discussion within that community,
In theory, yes, with an actual moderate person given the job; this does not ever turn out to be the case, then the moderator ismerely turned into the weapon of the baiter (aka faggotry we learned in school) - and at worst (or maybe at best) they take the job for sociopathic reasons of holding the ability to silence other humans for personal or political reasons.

Point is, as soon as you create the means for censorship (ban list words, etc.) then you have created a state of actual inequality and given the powers to the worst scum around.

> you will get people coming in to shit up a community
you will, but ime the vast majority of shit-posting is a kind of rebellion against the faggot rulers in the first place.

>the reason why board culture is slowly dying and being replaced by the same global 4chan culture based around baiting and making people angry.
or it's nothing special to here and is the current state of the censorship society that we live in.

[Anonymous No.21418366]

>>21417947
The point is that censorship can and does happen under the guise of moderation when you give people that level of control. If you don't understand that then you haven't been using the internet for very long and you don't seem to understand what makes 4chan different (in my mind better but maybe not in yours) from places like reddit.

[Anonymous No.21418380]

>>21418122
>The halcyon days of /lit/ that attracted people
I'm only here because /his/ became hitler and trad-cath central.

Still, the internet is a reflection of the society. Every whitish tween goes through the racism-jesus-jews cycle nowadays; some stay there for a long time and become the carcasses strewn on my lawn and barbed wire. I don't mind killing them in discussion, but like the germans crossing the rhine into borbetomagnus and gallia belgica, there's just no end to them. It's almost, given how much of western society lives online nowadays, a rite of passage to criminalize yourself as an adult with racist blogposts as a child. I feel sorry for them, but I just don't have the time to stop and think much about this pity due to having to keep killing them in large numbers.

[Anonymous No.21418389]

>>21416965
There literally was a thread about female snakes having clitorises. Not even literature resources about it, just them having clitorises. That thread was not deleted by the mods and was archived. The moderation on this site is so fucking insane: ban people for on-topic threads but shitposters are allowed to stay on the site and ruin every board. I've given up on 4chan. It's never going to be hood (nor was it ever, but it was at least tolerable before the 2016 election. It's like the site reaches new lows every year). I'm gonna look for another site that hasn't been this infected with /pol/ tourists and their /leftypol/ counterparts and literal children.

[Anonymous No.21418430]

We need a slower pace. Have a few great threads that last a week and have them not grow exponentially quickly, that way people have time to parse all the comments, think thoroughly about what they want to say, maybe even research what they want to say, and then maybe even re-read the comments and actually analyse them, otherwise people feel pressured to say some short soundbite without reading the whole thread and then move onto the next instantly digestible topic.
>>21416947
although i agree with you in principle, in practice i actually find the hard knocks they give out quite helpful, they sting like shit but they really toughen you up. It can get to the point where you’re interpreting anything any anon says as some form of attack but honestly it makes every place that’s not /lit/ a cakewalk, you find yourself instinctually going for the jugular and the weak as fuck arguments people through back at you hardly even warrant reply, maybe there should be a warning or something about that sort of culture, with checks and balances in place.

[Anonymous No.21418448]

>>21418430
>maybe there should be a warning or something about that sort of culture, with checks and balances in place
as I said, we need to remove anonymity on the internet to ensure corrupting elements receive their just desert

[Anonymous No.21418531]

>>21418448
Forums with genuine accounts can more effectively ban people, as well as IP ban people. Applying your real ID to the internet gives you the same problems social media has but pure anonymity just breeds the autism and off-topic posting by mentally invalid anons. At lesst with accounts, you could mock people for their abyssmal post history and general odiocy while not having to dox yourself (unless you are absolitr shit at opSec) and not be able to say what you actually have to say.

[Anonymous No.21418552]

>>21418389
I’ve been on 4chan since 2005, this website gets worse and worse with every day that passes. Pretty sobering to know I’ve wasted 17 years on here and /lit/ is still a shithole. No amount of effort posting will fix the board. The medium is the message.

[Anonymous No.21418553]

>>21418448
>>21418531
what in the actual fuck, this has to be bait. anonymity is the only thing keeping this whole shitshow together.

[Anonymous No.21418555]

Name five threads you'd like to see. Then, one better, start them. Problem solved.

[Anonymous No.21418557]

>>21418531
>>21418553
i cant hear you over the fact that you are banned in the future for holding such views, maybe scream a little louder upwards into the air to be heard by a living soul because i can't hear you over the fact that you are banned in the future for holding such views, try a performance in the middle of the street dance your heart out to be noticed by a living soul because i can't notice you over the fact that you are banned from entering my safe space.

[Anonymous No.21418561]

>>21418555
>name five threads you’d like to see
>post has 555 get

what did moot mean by this

[Anonymous No.21418562]

>>21418555
>name 5 books

[Anonymous No.21418614]

>>21418557
If I get banned off of a forum, I just leave or make a new account. Simple as. There rarely is anything worthwhile on most forums or imageboards. It's a way to pass the time, not work.

[Anonymous No.21418811]

>>21418614
So why not just preemptively do that instead of whining about the quality of this forum in a thread that does not positively contribute to the overall quality of this forum?

[Anonymous No.21418882]

Is this the thread were dozens of high quality effort posters come together and complain about how shit the board is and how it has 0 high quality effort posters? What are you faggots all doing then? Not making thread or effort posts in seems, just complaining in a meta thread. either fuck off or better yourselves, you clearly arn't the enlightened 'perfect users' you jerk off about being, don't even start with some shit about how every beautiful amazing thread you make magically gets 0 replies every time, this board is way too slow for bot spam too push off every non-bait thread.

[Anonymous No.21418943]

>>21418882
Oh look at him, shifting blame to the strawman individual instead of legitimately participating in the discourse. Good job, anon, you get a gold star today.

[Anonymous No.21418951]

thyridioteqc

[Anonymous No.21418960]

>>21416878
>How do we make /lit/ better?
Read better books and talk about them sincerely on /lit/. Respond to effortposters, while ignoring all shitposters. That's it. If enough people do this, /lit/ would be alright again.

[Anonymous No.21418970]

I’ve been on /lit/ for a decade now and you guys have been complaining about the bad poor quality the entire time. There were no good times, you guys used to literally just spam DFW pics and Pinecone threads all day long without growing tired of it

[Anonymous No.21418978]

>>21418970
dfw pics was board culture so it's okay

[Anonymous No.21419076]

>>21418811
Because that's time wasted doing those things instead of posting.

[Anonymous No.21419080]

>>21418970
I have 40+ pictures of dfw

[Anonymous No.21419102]

>>21416878
OP I can find posts like yours going 5-10 years back. The truth is the board has always been shit. You finally just climbed up high enough to get the full view. Occasional effortposters are a constant in a neverending stream of newfags aping the content of the esoteric memes they want to understand.

[Anonymous No.21419138]

>>21418970
>>21418978
DFW posting was a /lit/centric thing. It was like frogposting but actually funny. It never spread to other boards. It was our own little in joke. Now everyone just posts frogs or gets accused of avatarfagging. Remember avatar fags? Remember tripfags and namefags? Remember how Slow /lit/ used to be? Remember how mods actually deleted non-book related threads? Remember how we would talk for 250+ posts about nora's fat ass and thunder words? Threads upon threads of platonic dialogues out of sheer spite. Actual discussion about labor theory of value. Catalog of ships jokes. The only things left that are truly /lit/ are the Science Fiction General and the Writing General, which, come to think of it, basically is all of /lit/. Everything else is filler.

[Anonymous No.21419201]

>>21417129
This. Do we even have janitors? There were a lot of threads yesterday made solely to flood the catalog and they stayed up for hours.
This board could easily be decent if we had someone to keep the catalog clean. Kill frogposters, kill wojakspammers, kill every thread with a ragebait pic. That's all it takes.

[Anonymous No.21419526]

>>21418960
Its pointless to post this here. They are looking for someone to take up the responsibility of making a place good before they interact with it. If you dont believe me see >>21418614
>It's a way to pass the time, not work.

[Anonymous No.21419537]

I still get better recs on here than on any other website. Also people scan out of print books here.
Ironic that you bitch about "doomer threads" when that's exactly what this thread is

[Anonymous No.21419584]

>>21419537
>Ironic that you bitch about "doomer threads" when that's exactly what this thread is
Not even remotely similar.

[Anonymous No.21420405]

This board has become wayyy too fast and the quality reflects this. We need to return to current day /out/ at minimum.

[Anonymous No.21420428]

The best way to improve /lit/ is to read books and post about them, and try to get others to do the same. Anything else is nonsense and cope. It's a board about good books. The criterion for a good post is how much the post is about a good book the poster actually read. Any whining about direct or indirect means of influencing board quality other than this is just offloading the need to read good books and post about them onto others.

Read good books, make threads about them. There's a guy in the scifi/fantasy containment thread who actually reads shit and writes reviews. People shout him down but he keeps going. Be that guy with the books you like. There is a trickle down effect on /lit/ but it's on a delay. If you post about something enough someone will read it. Post your real thoughts about the books you like enough, wait a few months, and you will probably have someone to talk to.

Two things that could actually improve board quality:
>dedicted sqtddtot thread with OPs that actually keep it maintained and bumped
>running/regular "what are you reading now and what do you think of it" threads
WWOYM was a massive contributor to board quality by cleaning up blogposting crap that didn't deserve its own thread, SQTDDTOT would do the same thing if someone actually maintained it, and people got used to it enough that it simply entered into board tradition so that someone will make one if there isn't one. Currently reading/your thoughts on it threads would be similar to shelf threads, which are always popular, and they would feed off a natural renewable resource: opinionated autists' willingness to talk out their ass.

/lit/ reading groups like the short-lived Dante group could also work.

[Anonymous No.21420457]

/lit/ has been pretty decent lately imo. The amount of "books for this feel" and "[picture of random ethot] [3/10 bait opinion]" threads have dropped to the lowest I've ever seen them.

[Anonymous No.21420509]

>>21420457
If you genuinely believe that you haven’t been here before 2021 at best.

[Anonymous No.21420587]

>>21420509
I've been here since 2017. The nadir of /lit/ was probably 2020

[Anonymous No.21420675]

>>21416878
People here need to read.

[Anonymous No.21420696]

>>21420675
That will be the day when this place actually starts reading.

[Anonymous No.21422132]

>>21420405
but,
>"/lit/ is a slow board, there's no need to hurry or bump threads"
>thread closes after 15 minutes

[Anonymous No.21422171]

>>21418338
>>If you got btfo by one of these people because they could read Greek
>i've never encountered any such persons here, hence the funniness to consider that what you said is what ever memer thinks of themselves
You're the one who brought up memers in response to anon talking about anons who speak Greek. Your reading comprehension seems to be having a stroke to get frog posters and tradcaths out of that post. It is funny when you have a stroke you see frog posters, I'll admit, but for me the really funny bit is you didn't even try blaming the orthobros for Greek. Maybe stop hanging out with catholics so much if you don't want them to be the last thing you see before you die lol

[Anonymous No.21422238]

>>21422171
>Maybe stop hanging out with catholics
not sure what you're talking about anon, I have several catholics bleeding-out in my torture dungeon as we speak.

>Your reading comprehension seems to be having a stroke to get frog posters and tradcaths out of that post.
No this was literally all I was talking about; that "in the mind of a memer (shit-post, one-liner)" they believe they possess great grand hidden knowledge and that the shit-post is their "cosmic expression" of that massive galactic-spanning wisdom. Or, dunning-kruger.

>blaming the orthobros
>anons who speak Greek.
OOHH you meant Greek literally! Well now I see where you're coming from, no i wasn't meaning it like that at all.

Still.. "literally"... I've not encountered that either. At most I've encountered the maximal employ of "that type" when, as my memory searches years back, talking about things like the 'Ecclesia' and being told that the opinion of somebody nullifies the archaelogical and historical reality of what an ecclesia was because "they (claim) to know greek", i.e. a childish kind of denialism, things like that. i.e. trad-cathery.

I took your 'Greek' mention to be more akin to the yankee evangelist who announces he once met a Greek person is gets applauded for this by other yankee evangelists; pretense of authority to idiots, etc.

[Anonymous No.21422243]

>>21416878
1: make a tradcath LARPer board, similar to the /mlp( board
2: make an Evola/Guenon containtment board, also similar to /mlp/
3: create a filter that automatically permabans frogposters

Solved.

[Anonymous No.21422257]

>>21422243
>1: make a tradcath LARPer board, similar to the /mlp( board
the inherent problem with this is that the prosteltyzing mindset 'craves' preaching in order to be abused so that the abuse confirms their persecution complex; it's exactly like Proteus Peregrinus (see: Lucien of Samosata) standing in line with his coreligionists taking turns spanking each other on their bare-bottoms in the public forum.

[Anonymous No.21422265]

>>21416965
These are all great thread and better than any shit thread you would've made

[Anonymous No.21422266]

>>21422257
That's a good point, but I think it could be solved (as well as fulfill their masochist wishes and need to be persecuted) by having the janny move their threads immediately back to /tradcathLARP/.

[Anonymous No.21422279]

>>21422266
only if we're allowed to make several persecution chatbots to abuse them; we could term this the "laity project" but it would just radicalize them further by stoking their persecution complex to hitherto unimagined proportions.

[Anonymous No.21422286]

>>21422243
That would eliminate 99% of the remaining good threads on the board. The irony is Guenonposters are still one of the few left who actually read.

[Anonymous No.21422295]

>>21418552
The initial thrill offered by /lit/ wears off rather quickly. The whole site is kind of like a plughole. Anonymity and distraction. Unless you're a gamer larper or transphobic racist, overall it's pretty empty stuff. Occasional highlights like /fit/ and /hm/ but even they require that you're in the mood.

[Anonymous No.21422300]

I'm fed up of this conversation. You want good /lit/ back? Post more quality threads and hide the shitposting threads. If enough of us did this it would work but we have been demoralised by the shitposting

[Anonymous No.21422318]

>>21422295
>transphobic racist
This was me earlier in life; I took part in foot race marathons all the time and hated the very notion of transcontinental transport. It was a dark time for me.

[Anonymous No.21422321]

>>21422238
>have several catholics bleeding-out in my torture dungeon as we speak.
You're much more boring than you think you're deep. 2/10, genuinely believe you're 12

[Anonymous No.21422328]

>>21416922
Yes

[Anonymous No.21422330]

>>21422300
This problem isn’t unique to /lit/. The entirety of 4chan has just become dominated by these shitposters who make nonsensical low-effort threads for tiny bursts of attention. I used to go on /tv/ the most until most of the board became literal politics threads about news headlines. I can guarantee tomorrow on /lit/ someone is going to post a random picture related current day politics and culture war bullshit and ask “Books for this feel?”

[Anonymous No.21422346]

>>21422321
are you the same person? Ha, if so - it's been explained how you got it wrong but you respond with a non-sequitur insult anyway - then you're just shit-posting.

Now, if only we could get you onto a gurney and hook you up to truth drugs we could use the data to create a formula to eradicate all shit-posting.

'if' you're the same person, that is. You could be a filthy catholic interjector, looking to sully the character of orthodox bro by impersonating him. deplorable,either way, but the data i'd take from your writhing body would reach the same goal..

[Anonymous No.21422358]

>>21422346
>chunibyo fantasy about anons on 4chan
I look forward to your school shooting, kid

[Anonymous No.21422372]

>>21422358
catholic confirmed.

I offer a scientific and sound way to discover the true cause of a problem and you fear the remedy of the problem so much that in your head I am just "randomly killing people" - all this says is that you view the culture of shit-posting as something you cherish, as if it were an innocent score of children, you malding pederast shabbas goy, you ;0

[Anonymous No.21422504]

>>21422346
>>21422372
This anon thinks he's fighting shitposting and there's every chance it's not a false flag but in fact an accurate representation of the kind of more moderation and more reportfagging anons who really want *other people* to put out quality posts in response to their tantrums.
I cannot stress enough how much they want other anons to do the reading for them and then to listen to their uninformed rants like they're worthwhile.
Like the sticky used say before a mod fucked it up with his pretentious dumbassery
>Read a fucking book

[Anonymous No.21422507]

>>21422504
>it's not a false flag but in fact an accurate representation of the kind of more moderation and more reportfagging anons who really want *other people* to put out quality posts in response to their tantrums.
It's probably a false flag. He's either 12 or pretending to be.

[Anonymous No.21422512]

>>21422507
A lot of anons are just here to critique other anons larping. They really do not want to read books. I don't think anyone who likes books would bother to false flag ITT. Never assume a more complicated motivation than stupidity with anon.