When you censor the rest of the internet, the "scum" (aka people with non-PC opinions) will concentrate where they can talk without fear of censorship. You can be a "political-normal" on /pol/ but you won't have the politically-correct wind at your back like you do in so many other places.
Massive props to Moot for keeping 4chan alive as a bastion of free speech.
Complete bullshit. Reddit's /r/news, /r/politics, and /r/worldnews (which are default subreddits focused on politics) are regularly raided by Stormfront. Just this week the Reddit administrators finally got it into their heads to ban /r/niggers, which had functioned as "Stormfront on Reddit". This won't accomplish much, since subreddits like /r/WhiteRights or /r/newright remain alive and serve much the same purpose.
And that's just the neo-Nazis. /r/anarchism got quite nasty too, at one point, and God only knows what end of the spectrum /r/conspiracy are on.
And that's just the open extremist hate groups and subreddits that raid others on Reddit.
Just today I ran into a DailyKos thread from 2010 debating whether or not to ban reference to some blog on grounds that its text was indistinguishable to the already-banned Stormfront.
The internet is not nearly as censored a place once you get away from Facebook and CNN.
The fact that you are so hostile to these politically incorrect subreddits and blanketly label them all as "Stormfront" makes it clear that you are not in a position of rationality.
None of those groups ever "raided" anyone, unless you define it as linking from one subreddit to another. None of them ever encouraged downvoting, or even participation (although you can't expect them to not participate at all).
Some -- or at least one -- of the Reddit admins is a participant of the SRS (Shit Reddit Says) community which is notorious for being #1 for "brigading" other subs and massively downvoting anything and everything they disagree with. They have never even been considered for a ban to my knowledge, even though they sometimes discuss things like killing men.
It's fine for Reddit to make a decision to ban a subreddit because it might garner some bad press. However, it is ironic that Reddit call, or even consider itself a bastion free speech. They have banned other politically incorrect subreddits before (jailbait).
If you look at the rules which offending subreddits supposedly violated, you'll see that they are really just a tool for Reddit admins to selectively ban whomever they want.
"..regularly raided by Stormfront" -- I actually laughed out loud at this. Please, grow up.
Sure it was. While being more abhorrent to most people's moral sensibilities than the hard drug forums, the activity going on there was no more or less illegal.
> It's fine for Reddit to make a decision to ban a subreddit because it might garner some bad press. However, it is ironic that Reddit call, or even consider itself a bastion free speech. They have banned other politically incorrect subreddits before (jailbait).
A lot of people saw this coming when jailbait was banned. As abhorrent as it was, they were the tip of the iceberg in the Great Purification of Reddit. Once that door is open, the admins at Reddit HQ have to meet and defend the content of subreddits instead of merely evaluating the legality of their existence. Which is why I'm not surprised /r/nrs was banned this week. There's plenty more subreddits that will be equally difficult to defend in a corporate meeting.
I didn't bring up Reddit, but as long as we're talking about it... with all its mainstream celebrity AMAs and VC money, it's been doing a lot of "house cleaning" and is hardly a free speech zone anymore. The whole point of free speech is that unpopular groups aren't shut down for having unpopular opinions.
What you call "raids" I call links. Hacker News "raids" blogs everyday. Nothing malicious about it. If you're talking about actual, organized raids in the "you know what to do" fashion... well, I never saw that or any evidence for it.
The now-banned subreddit had an external forum (the name of the subreddit with a prepended 'r', if memory serves) which they used to coordinate raids with obvious malicious intent.
The whole point of free speech is that unpopular groups aren't shut down for having unpopular opinions.
Reddit's administration has made a point of this as much as they possible. But when you break the rules, you break the rules.
> they used to coordinate raids with obvious malicious intent.
Kind of like /r/shitredditsays (a forum exclusively for raiding other subreddits), which has the blessing of the reddit admins because it's PC...
> Reddit's administration has made a point of this as much as they possible.
Then why is this in the Reddit ToS?
You agree not to use any obscene, indecent, or offensive language or to provide to or post on or through the Website any graphics, text, photographs, images, video, audio or other material that is defamatory, abusive, bullying, harassing, racist, hateful, or violent. You agree to refrain from ethnic slurs, religious intolerance, homophobia, and personal attacks when using the Website.
Reddit is many things, but a free speech zone it is not.
I wouldn't quite say they PC... but I don't know what I would call them. I don't think there is really a term that adequately describes using shock tactics, belittling, and bullying to further an otherwise commendable cause. They are "Un-PC about being PC" I suppose.
For a computer enthusiast, a lot of /g/ is terrible. Going there with no knowledge as to why people would tell you to "install gentoo" or that "nvidia causes housefires" or that "ATI/AMD has no drivers" will confuse you very quickly. Everything on 4chan should be taken with a grain of salt, much like everything really.
However, once you are cluey enough to disregard the silly-ness of some people, you'll find some good resources. I found the logical increments PC Buying guide there a while ago and now that is the first point of call for when I'm helping a friend build a PC. Obviously I use it only as a guide and do more research myself, but its good to see such a high quality guide someone has created to help build a custom PC for an enthusiast. The Falcon, if you are also a hacker news reader, thanks for making such an awesome guide.
The anonymity of 4chan is both a blessing and a curse, Everyone is on the same level, with the same credibility until they open their mouth. If you want to put your words to a name you can (with a tripcode) but be prepared for the backlash of not being anonymous. All you have to go by is what a message says.
I don't think so. It's more like saying "I'm an oldfag, I'm a kind of elitist". The hipster who was on 4chan before it was cool.
Being on 4chan might be a kind of stigma, but not very much. I guess the average internet user looks down to thumblr not to 4chan. 4chan are a somehow the cool kids. Somehow.
"internet user" in what capacity (checks their emails every week, or participates on online forums?) and in what age bracket? Once you exclude most of the internet users who are only nominally "using the internet", I suspect most are at least vaguely aware of 4chan.
It's like publicly admitting you spend your spare time in a crack house: much of what goes on there is illegal, and a substantial portion is immoral or malicious.
With all respect, moot, 4chan breaks a huge number of laws about copyright protection (half of which were made specifically to illegalize file-sharing, of course). Raiding is certainly malicious, even if you enjoy it.
And I don't think debating morality with the founder of 4chan is productive; if you have a moral sense it must be almost entirely libertarian.
You should listen to Moot's talks on the subject of 4chan and free speech, which I will link below. As to "raiding," there are exactly zero boards on 4chan where raiding is allowed in the rules: it is globally banned on all boards, even /b/, which is the "no-rules" board.
Many of the 4chan communities are totally moral, from any standards: the cooking board (http://boards.4chan.org/ck) is my favourite board on 4chan, and it's just discussion of tasty eats.
As to copyrighted content, 4chan is the same as any other online message board that allows the embedding of images. 4chan has a staff of volunteer janitors to remove copyrighted content, and a smaller team of moderators to deal with repeat offenders.
Over 90% of the boards on 4chan are nothing but discussions about the particular subject. The most illegal stuff that happens on these boards is uploading images without permission, yes, it's that bad.
Most people who speak of 4chan in this way, are really just talking about /b/.
No, actually. I don't go to /b/. I can't even follow /b/; I try to keep track of a single thread or meme and it completely gets away from me. But as I said, there are some boards filled with blatant neo-Nazis, some filled with some of the world's more disgusting pornography, blah blah blah.
Now, if you want to call it "the last bastion of freedom [to spread hate ideologies, post loli hentai, etc]", go ahead. However, be clear that you are defending the freedom to commit immoral acts.
4chan is the Mal Reynolds of the internet, not Luke Skywalker.
At various times in history the ACLU has defended the KKK.
I see no problem with defending freedom of horrible people. Both from an ethical standpoint, and from a pragmatic standpoint (I would rather those people communicate in a way that has some visibility/oversight. You are not going to stop them, only push them underground; I think most would agree that would be a bad thing.)
At various times in history the ACLU has defended the KKK.
Yes, and? If you actually believe in free speech, calling someone a Horrible Person is not a disguised argument for shutting them down.
4chan is full of really horrible people. Sometimes I am one of them. This doesn't mean they should be shut down by the government or something. However, it also doesn't mean they're Glorious Heroes Fighting For Righteousness.
Seemingly everyone here who claims, against all evidence, that 4chan has a good moral character.
Now surely everyone is going to yell that they're just protecting their beloved web from censorship. However, since I never proposed censorship, that means most of them are arguing against the evil, censorious Congressman in their own heads, rather than against anything I actually said.
I think you fail to understand something : There are all kinds of people on 4chan. And dont come saying "laws about copyright protection" cause that is not a "crack house" .
>much of what goes on there is illegal, and a substantial portion is immoral or malicious.
Most, if not all, of your so called "illegal", "immoral or malicious" behavior comes from a certain handful of boards, of which there are over fifty. For most, the only illegal/immoral stuff they engage in is piracy and just generally being assholes, both of which can be found on almost any online congregation.
Ok, here's the thing: I don't even have huge moral problems with piracy, but it is very illegal. And "just generally being assholes" should damn well be labeled as a guilty pleasure, at least as it regards 4chan's interaction with the world outside 4chan.
Likewise, many people have no actual problem with smoking crack. That doesn't mean it's not illegal, and it doesn't mean there's no good reason people don't want to live next to a crack house. Or even a dive bar, for that matter.
Consistent cross-site raids conducted by sites like 4chan and SomethingAwful (and worse: hate groups are some of Reddit's most regular raiders) definitely do create the effect of having a virtual "bad neighbor".
I enjoy 4chan too, after having finally getting over being a newfriend (printing the polite version of that term) since half my IRL friends are anons. This doesn't mean I don't know damn well the site is a guilty pleasure and I shouldn't actually let myself get sucked into the Internet Hate Machine.
> Ok, here's the thing: I don't even have huge moral problems with piracy, but it is very illegal.
Ehm. Yes, piracy, as in armed robbery on the high seas, is indeed "very illegal" [sic]. Copy-pasta culture with images is arguably very close to fair use, so close that various aspects (sampling for music, being the most prolific) have been deemed legal.
Are you saying that you know of 4chan boards dedicated to (actual) piracy?
I would think hate speech is generally held to be "more" illegal than digital piracy in most countries. Copyright infringement is largely a civil matter, not a criminal matter.
By the way, I still want that word: "piracy" back. I do not, will not, accept that the copyright lobby has gotten away with stealing it.
Reading the things you say is like reading to what Senator Ted Stevens from Alaska said about the internet. The phrase 'newfriend' and anon, out of your mouth, made me cringe much the same way as when I receive tech support requests from tech-illiterate friends and relatives.
> I don't even have huge moral problems with piracy, but it is very illegal
Why should this make people concerned about admitting to going to 4chan anymore than piracy would make people concerned about using IRC, usenet, torrents, or even thepiratebay in particular?
My objection applies to all of the things that you mentioned, particularly IRC and "raiding". In fact almost all "raiding" that is associated with 4chan is actually planed/organized/orchestrated on IRC.
And? I would certainly say much of IRC is a "bad neighborhood" ethics-wise. It's half the fun of the internet that we can hang out in the worst neighborhoods of all, the very dens of crime and iniquity and blah blah blah, and yet stand no risk whatsoever of actually being mugged.
My point is that I would not expect a comment expressing surprise that people admit to using IRC, even though all the reasons you cite for your surprise at people admitting to using 4chan apply as well or better to IRC.
Not that I would ever advocate going there (or /b/) but a fair number of 4chan users on all boards are saying things for teh lulz. So only a portion of those are genuine neo-nazi scum.
The question I have there is: if most of it is trolling, why does the trolling skew to the far-right? You would think trolling as a Stalinist offers plenty of lulz, but far fewer people actually do it.
EDIT: This post was not sarcastic or ironic. Though I do think /pol/ is a hive of neo-Nazi scum /flameproof-suit.