https://www.yahoo.com/politics/it-s-either-trump-or-1317957587198006.html
Hello /news/, I come from /pol/ and have been lurking since the board was created. I have a few questions got you.
1) How many people do you think post on this board
2) How/why does this board have such quality discussion? Is it due to being a text board without flags? How can /pol/ improve their quality of discussions?
>>7856
In my opinion there are only about 20 or 30 regular posters, no more than 50 or 60 at most. If there is a breaking news event that number goes up though.
I'm not sure what can be done with /pol/, but I'm sure opinions here will vary wildly. Personally I think it's become too tinfoil for my tastes lately. Too much flat earth and illuminati BS. I think Hiro needs to make a /tin/foil conspiracy board for these people.
>>7856
> How many people do you think post on this board
God seriously, I can only pick out maybe fifteen. Doesn't mean there aren't more, I'm only basing this on how many unique personalities I interact with.
> How/why does this board have such quality discussion?
It's slower, so it's easier to take time to think out your arguments. A well-thought out post on /pol/ might exist for thirty minutes, and maybe one or two people read it. You never get a response because by the time people have had time to formulate their arguments, the thread has 404'd.
>How can /pol/ improve their quality of discussions?
You probably can't. /pol/ is what it is because there are people who want to post what gets posted there. If you try and reform it into something it's not, those people will have to go elsewhere--- they may end up coming here.
I don't think /pol/ is a bad thing though. It's an intimate look at things people keep hidden in polite society. Some people call it a "dark underbelly" but I think that misunderstands the value of it. It's lives on gut truths, things people know--or think they know--without all the polish, glitz, and virtuous posturing. This is why it's so hilarious.
>7856
It'd help if /pol/ wasn't an echo chamber circlejerk where anything not extremist far right is screamed at until it leaves. /pol/ is just tumblr for psycho ultra conservatives.
>inb4 I go to /pol/ and I am not conservative token post
Then you are a masochist.
The problem with /pol/ is it's a political board that only allows one side of a political argument. Sadly, I've had better more varied political debates on /b/ than I have on /pol/ simply because there were more varied opinions besides "nutjob hillbilly conservative"
>>7926
Except it's not.
>>7926
>That only allows one side of a political argument
What the fuck? It's pretty much the only forum on the internet that allows any political opinion to be aired no matter how the admins feel about it.
If your side pusses out, punks out, what does that say about the situation? Maybe that your opinion can't stand up against real scrutiny? If it's full of such idiotic and wrong nutjobs, it should be easy to just go there and own them 24/7 in every debate. But nobody ever does that.
>>7926
Then refuse to change, why ask if you don't want an answer? No one outside of /pol/ buys the "we are totally moderate down the middle guyz. There isn't a hardcore conservative majority" shit that gets tossed around. We've been there, we know how it's like, if you don't agree then just ignore those who state the truth.
/pol/ is a very far right extremist conservative board, and it acts very negatively to anyone who does not tow this line of conservativism. A one sided political board will always be trash for political discussion. So if you want to improve, there you go.
>>7856
I dunno how many people post. I tend to look at it once a day while loading the catalogs of the boards I browse.
Not sure about this boards discussion quality yet.
That depends on what you mean by improving. I think less religious or conspiracy threads would help. Getting rid of clickbait and spam would also help, but would be really difficult (and I think /news/ would rather not be the clickbait board).
I like how this thread became about /pol/ rather than /news/
>>7926
Not having moderators who do anything is not the same as the communities mindset. /pol/ is heavily conservative. I am at a loss as to why you came asking for improvements, get told why people dislike the board, then get upset and don't want to change it.
But nah man it must totally be the flags and images. It can't be the fact any non-conservative opinion is instantly shot down with memes and falsehoods. It can't be that at all.
Keep your terrible board m8. Don't improve it. Or do what you guys always do, take over more boards and make them shit.
>>7856
/pol/ lack here. Used to be good discussions there. Still are sometimes. Like anon said, it's just really popular now. Lots of shitposting, so you miss the good content if you blink
/pol/ was 4chan's fastest growing board in 2015, so there's your answer.
Not that that shithole was anywhere near "insightful" at any point in the past, nor is /news/ much better. Then again, judging a board's "quality" like it's some absolute value on a fuel gauge is the most newfaggy thing you can do.
>>7856
>2) How/why does this board have such quality discussion?
>No flag shitposting
>No meme spamming
>Not overrun by /b/ and /r9k/
>Quality, on topic news threads (ie no 'how can whites compete??' posts)
>Lots of left vs right debate
Honestly /pol/ isn't that bad if you have the attention span to find quality content/discussion which most people don't, hence the reason everyone thinks the board nothing but ultra-rightwing shitposting. /pol/ is pretty far gone at this point but /news/ has potential as long /pol/ quits the 'hurr no hugbox' shit everytime they'represented with an argument.
>>7866
I think Hiro needs to make a /tin/foil conspiracy board for these people.
/x/ already exists but doesn't allow politics.
>>8021
Mean't to green text that quote.
>>7866
it's "become" too tinfoil "lately"? Shit nigga, where've you been in 2013?
Either way, creating a new board is never a solution.
>>8021
/x/ sends the tinfoilfags back to >>>/pol/ because their threads aren't paranormal and then /pol/ sends them back to >>>/x/because they're batshit crazy. It's a problem that has been discussed at length on /qa/.
>>8038
I'm not new, I'm simply saying the tinfoil posts on /pol/ are getting worse. The repeating "Name your biggest /tin/foil conspiracy" threads would have never happened even in 2013, even after the infowars and GLP raids after Sandy Hook and the Boston Bombing.
>>7990
I've always wondered what would happen if /r9k/'s redundancy filter was activated on /pol/. I'm not saying this would fix the board (some /pol/acks seem to be legitimate schizophrenics and can't be fixed), but I don't think it could hurt anything at this point.
>>7856
I think /pol/ has much better quality of discussion.
>>7990
the problem is that people on /pol/ are tired, you see it everyday, people try to start a dialogue just to be trolled, million of threads where the op doesn't care about other opinions, is just a troll or a shill, its one of the reasons people don't argue as much on /pol/, its not worth the effort, are you going to waste your time just to be trolled in the end when the guy runs out of arguments or was blatantly lying from the start?
you want to fix /pol/ kill all threads and ban the the op post and bails, the /b/ content "how can x even compete?" "is this degenerate?", i know /pol/ is shit, but is not only because we hold conservative views, its because part of our "community" is shit, and there is not much we can do except try to expel everyone that is a troll or shill, but normal poster sometimes get caught on the crossfire, if you ever tried to make a good thread and was ignored i am sorry but know that is more to the issue
>>8066
>I'm simply saying the tinfoil posts on /pol/ are getting worse
So you are new?
>>7856
>1) How many people do you think post on this board
100 tops
>2) How/why does this board have such quality discussion? Is it due to being a text board without flags? How can /pol/ improve their quality of discussions?
See the first question. Small boards are more likely to be high quality. /pol/ is fucked.
>>8066
>repeating "Name your biggest /tin/foil conspiracy" threads
I haven't been to /pol/ in almost a year, but I don't remember no such threads on the occasions I did visit it. I can't really see any such thread up there now.
>>8168
>I don't remember no such threads on the occasions I did visit it. I can't really see any such thread up there now.
Here's a sample, or at least here are some archived on 4plebs in these search results:
http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/search/text/favorite%20conspiracy/type/op/
This is maybe half of them that don't use a differently worded OP post that I know of.
My point is that these people are the gypsies of 4chan. They continually roam from >>>/pol/ to >>>/x/ to >>>/k/ to >>>/int/ looking for somewhere to discuss their absolute certainty of NWO illuminati, parking outside the community making loud noises until pulling up stakes and moving on to the next community. Most people on other boards like /a/ say they belong on /pol/ or /x/ but both of those boards don't want them. And it's only getting worse. We can only hope these people don't make /news/ another home away from home.
>http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/search/text/favorite%20conspiracy/type/op/
That link shows barely a dozen threads in over a year, many of which are obviously baits. I really, really don't see what you're talking about. Sounds like you're just looking for something to complain about.
>>7856
About with almost 8k posts so far, maybe 2-4k people have posted in total.
Pol is too far gone, its the /b/ for /news/. Call it natural selection.
>>8182
Are you trolling? They happen every other day. As I said, that isn't even all of them. The search result was just a sample because I thought it was obvious enough. This is not a matter of my opinion, this is a documented plague on the boards, codified in >>>/biz/rules/2 , continually complained about at length by hundreds if not thousands of people on /pol/ and /qa/ and even /x/. You can dismiss it if you want but it won't make it go away.
Honestly it would be tough. /pol/ has a reputation that's dragging more, and more radical right wingers to the circle jerk.
>>7856
1) I think less than 400 people have posted here, and with 30 or so regulars. I've posted about 50 times.
2) a) I think the quality of discussion is higher here because of a mix of factors including, 1. No reason for shills or 'subsistence trolls', 2. Ostensibly not racist and work-safe, 3. Current Events therefore regular, and presumably, better readers, 4. Slower therefore more thoughtful discussion
2)b) /pol/ could be saved, but it should be left alone, 1. /pol/ is a watering hole for the most impressionable idiots and the biggest shills on the internet and there's money in both of those, 2. I'm sure it's already been said, but containment for the sake of other boards
>>8292
i've changed my mind. Instead of,
> /pol/ is a watering hole for the most impressionable idiots and the biggest shills on the internet and there's money in both of those
I think it should read "/pol/ is a watering hole for the most impressionable idiots and/or people that believe they are biggest shills and shill teams on the internet, and there can be money in that"
>>7881
Very interesting. A follow up question to that (one that can't be asked on /pol/ without being shit-posted to death) is how accurate /pol/ is as a political counter-movement? Also, how accurate at predicting things are we really?
>>7927
>>7928
>>7929
>>7934
He>>7926 is not me.
>>7942
I still try to sift through it, but it's becoming increasingly difficult to differentiate shitposting/memes and satire, from actual opinions. For example, Trump is probably one of the largest memes in the history of /pol/ and /new/, but it's hard to find what people really think of him, or how well they think he'll actually do.
>>7985
I'm not judging /pol/ or any other boards by their "quality", I'm asking about how and why /news/ has so much more actual discussion and much less shitposting and memes than /pol/
>>8088
Kek
>>8095
Yes, lack of the moderation team enforcing rules and tons of shit threads push down any good discussion worthy threads. Hell, I saw 6 "How can white me even compete" threads in the catalog at the same time.
>>8164
>Small boards are more likely to be high quality
That does sound accurate, but what about large boards that have great amounts of discussion such as /k/?>>8292
>>8293
Interesting input, thanks
why discussions on /pol/ low quality?
i wonder :^)
http://img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/image/1447/09/1447096914597.png
>>7926
t. reddit
>>8021
There are some conspiracy theories that people like discussing. I'm sorry if you don't ever question your sources or look more into these things, but they literally come with the news territory.
>>8353
The regulars here seem to know the difference between conspiracy theories and conspiracies being reported in the news.
That isn't always true on other boards. That's why a /tin/foil board needs to be made. Both /pol/ and /x/ don't want those threads.
>>8371
>I don't follow, but I wish to learn more.
I don't quite understand either, but I think it is something having to do with shills ruining the board. Notice how the IDs are responding to their own posts.
I've spent a lot of time on /pol/ and get a kick out of some of the content. I enjoy the threads that contain a lot of information, and some of the memes are hilarious. But it takes so long to find what I'm looking for; to wade through the shit.
/news/ is a quality board, and I'm real happy that its text. I think that is the main contributor to its superior content. I think that many of the disenfranchised /pol/locks post and lurk here.
I lurk /news/ much more than I post here, and stop by often to see what is interesting to the posters, much like I would check other news websites for stories. Just my anecdote, but there may be more people here than it appears.
>>8691
How serious do you treat /pol/? What do you unironically believe in: Trump? The Jews?
/pol/ needs to get a grip on its /b/ tier threads and it will be fine.
The aussies and leafs need to go as well.
>>8718
I don't treat /pol/ too seriously, especially with the tin foil shit and all. But I do like some of the news threads, and the Syria threads. I do plan to vote for Trump.
>>8367
I take offense on a conspiracy board, especially one named /tin/. I like looking into things like Opus Dei and the Skull and Bones society and would post on both /x/ and /pol/. Who says both boards are not capable of talking about conspiracy theories? That just means two userbases are able to interpret conspiracies in their own way.
>Both /pol/ and /x/ don't want those threads.
I don't understand this. Sure, /pol/ wouldn't talk about paranormal underlinings of conspiracies, and /x/ likes to delve into the unnatural to explain certain events, but I highly doubt both boards are unwilling to accept conspiracy theories, especially if they bring in content aside from the usual jews or reptilians being behind everything.
>>8691
>/news/ is a quality board
Let's hope that this quality doesn't end up like the /n/- N ews, p.lus. 4c han's /n/, /new/, or 4c h. 0 n's /new/, in which case it was either too fucking slow or consumed by tripfags on their soapboxes.
/pol/ was the end result of an unregulated news board. Aside from the IDs and flags, it was a good place, especially during the time when moot actually cared about /pol/ topics and added optional ideology flags.
>tfw system thinks your post is spam
sdfasdfgr
i dont have much to say on the matter but i would just like to say this board is quickly becoming my new favorite even though i mostly just lurk. keep up the quality!
>>7928
>it should be easy to just go there and own them 24/7 in every debate. But nobody ever does that.
It happens thousands of times a day but when it comes to facts /pol/ is like everyone other than Bill Murray in Groundhog Day.
I seem to have less than active posts but I can't make more than 5 active posts for some reason.
Anyone else having an issue with this?
>>8718
There is nothing to really believe on /pol/, it's almost entirely catchphrases and arrogant opinions. Because most threads don't even have dubious sources, they are just shit. The only reason people go there is to bait or shitpost.
>>11210
you're way off
wrong
lurk moar
