Allow me to quote from the sticky on /pol/:
>This board is for the discussion of news, world events, political issues, and other related topics
>The variety of threads allowed here are very flexible and we believe in freedom of speech, but we expect a high level of discourse befitting of the board
How do these statements gel with the introduction of flags and forced IDs, both of which are proven to encourage shitposting and lower the discourse on any board they are introduced to? You only have to look at /his/, another board for the discussion of culture and world events, to see how the quality of discussion is improved through removal of IDs and flags.
Moot added flags and forced IDs to "punish" /pol/ due to its exposing of his affair with [REDACTED]. He knew it would lead to a) shitposting about flags subsuming real discussion and b) reducing the quality and complexity of discussion by forcing everybody to maintain a consistent line of thought in a thread, rather than allowing each post to stand on its own merits (i.e. 4chan's point of difference).
We need to remove IDs and flags. We need to allow /pol/ to flourish as a place for free discussion, where posts are discussed based on the validity of the ideas expressed - not on whether the dominant cultural narrative finds them acceptable, not based on what country the poster is from, and not based on one's post history.
Why are we so scared of having a board where people can discuss world events, political issues, etc. freely? Why are we allowing /pol/ to be ruined?
>>338297
IDs facilitate discussion, lack of them encourages taking multiple sides to try to simulate cancerous arguments, accusations of samefagging designed to derail threads. If you're complaining that moot implemented the flags for his own reasons, then there's no point in appealing to moot's earlier comments about his love for posting as full anon.
>>338346
>lack of them encourages taking multiple sides to try to simulate cancerous arguments
What? That makes no sense? Why are you even on 4chan if you dislike the concept of anonymous posting?
A lack of IDs allows each post to stand alone and be judged on its content. You don't need to worry if people are "taking multiple sides" because there is no continuous identity on 4chan - you can judge each post on its merits, it doesn't matter if somebody posted from multiple "sides" because it is the post that matters not the person doing it.
>>338356
>What? That makes no sense? Why are you even on 4chan if you dislike the concept of anonymous posting?
I'm pretty anonymous on /pol/, just not within the same thread. I can't open a thread with one of the deformed kids advocating eugenics and then pretend to be a butthurt prolifer. On the other hand, I can certainly explore both sides of the issue by being clear that that's what I'm doing, or not taking a firm position. We're not diminished by losing that one specific mode of posting.
>A lack of IDs allows each post to stand alone and be judged on its content.
In practice that doesn't happen, Mr Samefag Derail comes in and says all these posts are samefag.
>You don't need to worry if people are "taking multiple sides" because there is no continuous identity on 4chan
I don't worry about it, you seem to be worrying that it doesn't happen everywhere.
>>338382
You don't belong here faggot
>>338382
>Mr Samefag Derail comes in and says all these posts are samefag
The point is it doesn't matter if somebody is a "samefag". All that matters is the content of individual posts. You can ignore people who post about samefags, it isn't hard.
>I don't worry about it
Okay. then you have no justification for advocating the destruction of /pol/, do you?
>>338432
>You can ignore people who post about samefags, it isn't hard.
Try ignoring the IDs then.
>then you have no justification for advocating the destruction of /pol/, do you?
It's chugging along just fine for the rest of us.
>>338297
IDs can stay (really, I couldn't give a shit if they stay or go), but flags are cancer and do nothing to help discussion.
fuck, flags are a large part of the reason why /int/ is pretty much just international shitposting
>>338462
Obviously flags are enemy #1 when it comes to /pol/ being destroyed by shitposting. However, IDs have always reduced quality of discussion on every bord they have been introduced to. There should be ZERO emphasis on the poster, focus should be on the content of the post alone. That is why IDs MUST be removed.
''we wuz kingz'' threads need to stop
IDs and Flags are a problem, but the main problem is that the rules of the sticky are never enforced.
>>338297
>asking to fix pol
>asks to remove flags and ID's
>ignoring absoloutely everything else that is wrong with pol
You have your priorities mixed up, the flags and ID's are there because pol is shit, pol is not shit because of IDs and flags.
DONT CHANGE THE FLAGS.
>>338520
There's no point when IDs and flags were deliberately introduced to destroy discussion. There's just no way to fight against the shitposting and redditors until flags and IDs are gone.
/pol/ could be a great board if the sticky was enforced and flags and id's were removed.
>>338541
>ignoring absoloutely everything else that is wrong with pol
Let me guess, you think the problem with /pol/ is people being allowed to express problematic opinions your professor told you were bad, right? In your opinion shitposting about flags is all that /pol/ is good for unless all naughty opinions are banned.
>>338559
THIS
the only way to fix it is to delete it #deletepol
Is the fact that I couldn't post on /pol/ before but now can a good thing for me or a bad thing for /pol/?
>>338297
>both of which are proven to encourage shitposting and lower the discourse on any board they are introduced to?
Proof?
>>338559
I agree but the mods don't want the job. if they can't be fucked then they need to make room for someone that does.
>>338661
Are you sure all those posts were started by Indians? Or were they started by people much smarter than you who want to reduce unfunny shitposting on /pol/?
MAKE. /pol/. GREAT. AGAIN.
/pol/ IS DEAD.
WE WILL MAKE IT BIGGER BETTER AND STRONGER THAN EVER BEFORE.
IDs AND FLAGS HAVE GOT TO GO. THEY HAVE TO GO.
>>338672
>Indians
>smart
LEL
>>338684
this
>>338297
I hate the IDs but I see them as a necessary evil because I remember how it was when constant accusations of samefaggotry derailed threads.
That said, bring back novelty flags. I miss posting as Based Texas without a Chilean proxy.
>>338702
This thread again?
>>338712
India is starting to rub poo in his wounds.
>search for 'judged content' on desustorage's /qa/ archive
>27 posts, most after October 24
He legitimately thinks 4chan is a NORMAL image board
>>338702
literally all me
>>338712
It won't stop until flags and ids are removed.
>>338429
wow good job taking a screenshot of wayback machine
>>338718 (You)
If you have nothing to contribute, don't post at all.
![5361979+_4c5879bf6cf9c56e5590611ae34a3382[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/NGs7yrb.jpg "5361979+_4c5879bf6cf9c56e5590611ae34a3382[1].jpg")
>>338715
>>338702
>>338297
This NEEDS to happen and fast.
>>338720 (You)
Samefag detected
>>338297
>You only have to look at /his/, another board for the discussion of culture and world events, to see how the quality of discussion is improved through removal of IDs and flags
>FLAGPOSTERS BTFO
>ID(UCKS BTFO
>REDDITORS ON SUICIDE WATCH
Logic saves the day again.
>>338297
Flags, sure. They definitely increase shitposting.
But I remember /pol/ before it had IDs and it was every bit as shitty as it is now.
>forcing everybody to maintain a consistent line of thought in a thread
...this is a bad thing, how? I generally oppose IDs on most boards, but they're a good thing on boards that are structured around debate rather than hobbies. How can you have a meaningful debate with someone when they can just pretend to be someone else whenever their retarded arguments get torn apart?
>>338801
>.this is a bad thing, how?
Because the person posting should be irrelevant in every way, including their post history. That's what made 4chan so successful: every post stood on its own merit and was judged only by its content. You don't need to debate "someone" on 4chan, every post can enter into the debate and you are arguing against the post's content, not against the poster.
If you want to argue with identifiable people, go to a forum or almost anywhere else on the internet. 4chan is for the debate of ideas, not for two people arguing with each other. If you prefer the forum/reddit model, it is nothing to be ashamed of and you are welcome to go back to those sites. But the 4chan model is for ideas to debate each other, not people.
>>338806
4chan is for imagedumping and hobbies retard, it was never meant for actual debate and /pol/ is an example of why that goes poorly. IDs should be gone, but that'd further kill /pol/, not that bad of a thing considering the publicity you bring.
>>338811
>4chan is for imagedumping and hobbies
4chan is for discussing things, including images and hobbies, without having the identity of a poster or the history of their posts within the discussion mattering.
>it was never meant for actual debate and /pol/ is an example of why that goes poorly
How?
>IDs should be gone
Good point.
>>338815
>>IDs should be gone
So much this. Get rid of flags and IDs, /pol/ has suffered enough.
>>338815
>without having the identity of a poster or the history of their posts within the discussion mattering.
Where has moot said this?
>>338912
Who cares? It is what made 4chan great. That is why IDs and flags must be removed from /pol/.
>>338815
>>IDs should be gone
This.
IDs are shit. Newfags have no idea what the board was like before IDs were implmented. protip: was actually not bad.
>some samefag just posts quality discussions to himself so his stance is more persuasive
>butthurt newfag derails with off-topic trolling and shouting 'samefag!'
>an anon who is tired of samefag makes another topic to counter said samefag
>the first year of /pol/ was quality content
>>338297
>You only have to look at /his/, another board for the discussion of culture and world events, to see how the quality of discussion is improved through removal of IDs and flags
/int/shits BTFO
Remove the flags they're cancerous on all boards outside of /int/.
/pol/ needs IDs and flags. get over it.
It's not like you browse it anyway. You just bitch about it.
>>338923
>/pol/ made 4chan great
tidus.avi
>>338923
>I don't have proof, let me dodge the question
>>339009
>/pol/ needs IDs and flags
How? It's not like you browsed /pol/ before it was saddled with that shit.
>>339039
It's not like you have to browse /pol/ either, but you can't seem to get that through your head.
>>339095
>dodging the question
>>338346
We should just create /gpol/ - good /pol/
>>338346
>there's no point in appealing to moot's earlier comments about his love for posting as full anon
Literally nobody in this thread has appealed to moot's shitty opinions on anything. Moot didn't even realize anonymous posting was what made his site great until it had been going on for years, and when he finally did he went full faggot and did all kinds of tedx talks and other gay shit promoting it. If even moot can realize the value of anonymous posting, why can't you? Oh, that's right, you hate /pol/ and want it destroyed by IDs and flags.
>>338801
>I generally oppose IDs on most boards
but not /pol?
>>339205
If we removed flags and IDs there would be no need.
>>338297
>Why are we allowing /pol/ to be ruined?
Well, Hiroshima?
Will these threads continue to be ignored?
>>340538
Bump.
FIX POL REMOVE IDS REMOVE FLAGS
It would be so easy to fix /pol/, yet Hiroshima takes no action on the cancerous IDs and flags. Sad really.
Oh look, all the threads about this have been bumped again.
>>342710
Gee, I wonder why... Maybe because IDs and flags STILL haven't been removed from /pol/?
>>342717
>IDs and flags STILL haven't been removed from /pol/
Unbelievable.....
what are the biggest boards btw.
>>344377
Undertale.
>whine about JIDF whatever literally anyone disagrees with you and demand IDs and flags
>moot adds it as a joke
>whine about it
>>344485
>moot adds it as a joke
He added it as a punishment.
How to fix /pol/:
Remove ids and flags and enforce the sticky. Is that really so hard?
>>344850
How to fix /pol/: Ban all Indians
>>344855
Banning Indians would literally fix the internet. And not because of some reddit-tier "poo in loo" gay ass may may, but because Indians are responsible for all the shitty spam in existence.
However, that's not the topic at had here. We need to fix /pol/ by removing flags and id's and enforcing the sticky. What part of that is hard to understand?
>>344903
>We need to fix /pol/ by removing flags and id's and enforcing the sticky. What part of that is hard to understand?
About as hard as understanding why UNICEF India needed to teach one billion people to use a toilet?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_peUxE_BKcU
>>>/pol/55774551
>there are Indians in this thread who actually enjoy POO IN LOO
Look how well they handle it. They even laugh at the poor people in their country.
>>344931
What a stupid thread. Belongs on /int/ or reddit not /pol/.
>>344944
Wow, you're a massive sook. Indians on /pol/ can handle banter but you cry about it.
Now you're crying about Indians who have thicker skin than you.
Grow up.
>>344967
>banter
That's a funny way of spelling shitposting.
All I have to do is read your posts aloud and I can tell you are an awkward, cringy faggot in real life. You have never "bantered" in your life, you pathetic little nerd.
>>344990
Who cares how it's spelled as long as you're unable to handle it? If you want it to end, turn off your computer and do something productive.
Agreed.
What do you call an Indian who poos in the loo?
Not an Indian.
>>344995
WE DEMAND THE IMMEDIATE REMOVAL OF IDS AND FLAGS.
>>338297
>forcing everybody to maintain a consistent line of thought
You are literally complaining that you're not allowed to samefag here. Fuck off.
>>346326
That's not the point. 4chan is an anonymous site, a lack of continuous identity frees people to post things, exploring various angles, they wouldn't have otherwise posted and that is why 4chan is so successful. If you hate the idea of anonymity, you know where you can go back to, right?
>>338297
Couldn't we just allow OP to disable or enable flags and call it a day?
>>346390
No, because it's a lot easier to simply remove IDs and flags entirely. Anything less is unacceptable.
No board on 4chan should force you to have ids and flags, least of all /pol/.
>>346744
Thank you for your service. Your one hundred posts per day reinforming the masses of the moderator's never to-do list will surely not be forgotten
>>346361
>That's not the point. 4chan is an anonymous site,
Which IDs don't stop or prevent.
>a lack of continuous identity frees people to post things,
Yep. You can still post things with an ID.
>exploring various angles, they wouldn't have otherwise posted and that is why 4chan is so successful.
You can do that with an ID too. Nobody's stopping you from looking at both sides of the issue. Or are you just mad you can't go
>Post 1: HITLER WAS RIGHT!
>Post 2: >>replytopost1 YOU LIKE HITLER CISSEXIST!
>Post 3: >>replytobothposts LOL REKT
>If you hate the idea of anonymity, you know where you can go back to, right?
If you know nothing about the history of anonymous text/imageboards and think IDs (which were used on both 2ch and Futaba for years, and even moreso Futaba that sometimes used the hostname) ruins the social anonymity these sites were meant to provide, you know where you can go back to, right? Maybe /r/4chan is more your speed.
>>346747
You don't belong on 4chan if you like IDs, period. No amount of mental gymnastics changes the facts.
>>346759
Shhhhh, newfag. I just explained how IDs did not stop anonymity and how they had been in use for years on the very sites 4chan came from. That's why they're a feature at all, they're built right into the code from day 1. They were just never used until relatively recently in 4chan's history unless you count the various times it was an on and off thing over on /b/.
Now you can cry all you want and flail around like a newfag, but that doesn't change the facts that none of your complaints were valid and shows a very poor understanding of what textboards and imageboards are and how IDs play a role in them when we have years worth of knowledge about it because they were in use on sites like 4chan for years before 4chan was even made. So just stop. Go back to wherever you came from or lurk more before posting about things you clearly know nothing about.
>>346768
What part of "you don't belong on 4chan if you like IDs" is confusing you? Instead of writing novels that nobody will read outlining why you think 4chan should resemble a forum, why not simply return to reddit?
>>338297
>>338520
>>338559
>>344850
>>344903
Yeah, sorry OP, you can't use the /pol/ sticky excuse anymore. You see, you can't use something as proof and dismiss the same proof when it's used to counter your argument. Uh-uh. Sorry. Wrong. Not a good idea. Bending the rules is bad mkay.
>>346791
>he's posting that retarded image again
>>346799
All you can do is meme because you know he's right.
>>346799
Could you substantiate the claim that the aforementioned composition of posts is "retarded" as per the high level of discourse which the /pol/ sticky expects from...
Ahhhh, I seem to have let it slip my mind once more, you actually can't use the /pol/ sticky to substantiate anything since you're using it as one-way evidence. Shame. Unfortunate. Better luck next time. Wish you well. Sad to say it. Ya blew it. Try again. Two lives left.
>>346806
>he's right
>implying you are not he
There's no way more than one person is stupid enough to think that image makes any sense, pal.
>>346774
You're the one who belongs on Reddit out of anyone here given your stunning lack of knowledge regarding anonymous sites. Please, feel free to go back to wherever you came from and stop being a massively uninformed idiot.
You're disappointing Hiro when he said that he's happy there were no stupid 4chan users.
>>346815
I just skimmed it and it looks fine to me, what seems to be the problem here?
>>346815
Yeah, I'm going to need a sufficient amount of backing up on that claim. For you see, a good argument consists of well-sourced evidence, a confident contention, and a high level of discourse...
Oh, my bad. The /pol/ sticky encouraged a high level of discourse, so you really can't use that. That's the way it is. Oh well. Shocking. Life sucks drop out. Nope. Sorry. Impossible. You'll improve.
>>346817
>You're disappointing Hiro when he said that he's happy there were no stupid 4chan users.
That's not even what Hiro said. He was talking specifically about believing information without a source. He was also being sarcastic, because people were accusing him of selling info because of some /v/tard's shitpost.
>>346827
What do you think the image is telling you?
>>338940
shill please fucking leave
yes, SHILL.
/pol/ shitposting revolves around being contrarian, sometimes within the same thread. People will literally shit up the thread sockpuppeting with themselves in order to create a mass public consensus when there is none.
Much like you little kikes are trying to do on this board, with 47 keywords encompassing /pol/ bitching on the catalog right now
If anything, /qa/ needs thread IDs to blow you little shitstains out, because it's only a small minority of you fuckers trying to derail the board for shits and giggles.
>We need to remove IDs and flags.
Bernie shill or poo in loo?
>>347368
>BAWWWW
If you can't handle the heat, return to reddit. /pol/ shitposting revolves around flags, and everybody is scared to express themselves due to the weight of ids. It's a horror show at this point. Remove ids, remove flags.
>>347528
>r-return to p-plebbit
everytiem. like a little rulebook you have when people disagree with you, because you don't have an actual counterargument or a point to make.
>l-look guys I'm using the same jargon as other 4channers, I fit in right!?
>>347735
so is attacking the poster instead of responding to his argument
>>347735
Actually, advocating for IDs legitimately means you need to return to your reddit hugbox.
Bamp
>>347747
Hi there! I'm your friendly neighborhood discussion improver! It seems that your post is lacking evidence. You, being an advocate of the /pol/ sticky, surely must provide evidence! It is crucial for discourse to be exercised since that is what the /pol/ sticky encourages.
Wait, no, there's a reason you can't! You see, due to your inability to argue, you think that the /pol/ sticky means squat when confronted on the topic of logical fallacies! That's definitely bad discourse! But that's okay, you don't have to use discourse since you dismissed the /pol/ sticky. True story. Eyup. Uh-huh. Correct. Truth. Smash dat mufuckin /trash/ button.
>>338356
It's sad how this was the second post in the thread and made an inarguable case against IDs, yet the thread still grew by over 100 posts with the trolls doing everything they can to distract from the issue just because they hate /pol/. Being a /pol/ack is to be a pariah, but we remain committed. Why? Because we believe in free speech and we love 4chan. Despite everything, we believe IDs and flags will eventually be removed and 4chan will see how much we love this place. You can call us crazy, but that's what love does to you. It makes you hope against all odds.
>>348718
>we believe in free speech
I have the freedom of speech to call out Indians on /pol/. Eat my ass.
>>338297
>WE NEED TO FIX /pol/
if you didn't realize, /pol/ is being ripped apart, every new board takes content that was dicussed on /pol/ until now, /his/ is taking all history discussions and /news/ is practically the rest.
I agree that we need to fix /pol/. Every time I'm engaging in discussion, a fucking Indian comes in and ruins everything. What we need to do is range ban Indian IPs, because all they do is shitpost, shitpost, shitpost. In fact, why not put their IP range in a sitewide blacklist?
>>348737
Not really, /his/ was always supposed to exist as a separate board. Also, /news/ will be for discussing news stories from the last 48 hours. /pol/ is more for discussing the wider social/political implications of current events. That is a difference, and it's why flags and IDs should be removed - there's no need to encourage shitposting on /pol/, this site is well served by having a specific place people can discuss social/political events, theories, etc.
>>348750
>this site is well served by having a specific place people can discuss social/political events, theories, etc.
Everybody who wants their boards to remain on-topic is adversely affected by /pol/ being made unusable. Even the "hurr /pol/ is le containment board" crowd should understand that removing IDs and flags would make it a more effective "containment board".
