So if a majority (say 75% or more) of users on a board voted and agreed on making a reasonable change (such as making a board sfw, nsfw, or creating new bannable offenses) why shouldn't they go into effect or at least some kind of trial mode?
>>402763
Because 4chan isn't a democracy and never should become one. You're lucky to even be allowed to post here. You could be banned at any moment for an offence that you didn't commit, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
>>402763
Because the users don't own 4chan, Hiroshima Nagasaki does.
>>402763
>majority
top kek how's your first week here
>>402763
because the majority of board users do not actively participate in threads you fucking newfag
>>402794
Been here since 2011. defintiely not my first week boi
>>402763
Because direct democracy would be a tyranny of the majority. The reason some of us use 4chan instead of some shitty social media site is because everybody here is on equal terms. It doesn't matter how unpopular your opinion is, you're still entitled to it. With your proposal in place, unpopular opinions (e.g. this could mean you) would become bannable offenses, and 4chan would be nothing more than an echo chamber where people regurgitate the same shitty opinions ad infinitum with no original thought ever permitted.
tl;dr - Fuck off
>>402799
>thinks the majority of a board could ever be polled
Even if you were to discount lurkers, you'd have to be a fucking idiot for such a concept to pop into your head. Do you have any idea how many people use each board?
>>402805
A poll could be stickied and all the users regular enough to care about the changes would vote. People that don't vote should not care when the board is changed
>>402805
The only way the majority of the board could be polled is if Hiroyuki put some sort of redirect to a poll on a per-IP basis into the board itself.
>>402808
The only reason I could fathom you thinking such a concept would work is if you knew nothing about the population of each board and how they interact with the board itself
