What happened?
You are currently reading a thread in /qa/ - Question & Answer
What happened?
>>462479
Simple - we became too popular and the flood of newfriends overwhelmed and eventually supplanted the previously established userbase.
Shit, my younger cousin in 7th grade openly browses and talks about 4chan with family. When I asked where he learned about it, he said all his friends at school know about and go to 4chan.
I got fat
>>462479
WHAT DO YOU MEAN 2016?
IT TURNED INTO THAT PICUTURE ON 200"6"
TWO THOUSAND AND SIX
WAS THE YEAR 4chan died.
2005
WAS THE LAST YEAR THAT 4CHAN WAS ALIVE!!1111
AT THE END OF 2005 4chan began to DIEEEEEEEEE
2005 WAS thE PEAK OF 4chan!!!111
WRYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
>>462494
>mfw
>>462479
me on the left
Retards kept breaking R1&2 back in 2007. Then, thanks to Chanology, we had a massive influx of moralfags in 2008.
The result is that everybody knows about 4chan nowadays. This is an irreversible damage, but we can control it.
>>462479
Social media.
>>462621
The moralfags were already present. They started chanology, the newfags didn't.
Also the raids against Hal Turner, typical moralfaggotry.
4chan is now almost moralfag-free. Chanology couldn't happen today.
>>462630
The attacks against CoS happened because CoS tried to censor the internet, and anons didn't like it. Do you really think a moralfag would ever send bomb and death threats to someone?
The Hal Turner attacks, well, as far as I remember, Hal couldn't handle a joke and publicity published phone numbers from multiple Anons. He also threatened to sue us.
>>462648
>publicly published
Fixed.
niggers
>>462648
No, it was moralfaggotry, pure and simple.
I'm not even going to argue about this, just stating the facts.
There was no media backlash against Chanology, guess why? It was moralfaggotry an the SJW's loved it. Compare with gamergate that got heavily critized everywhere.
Alright, alright, we've all seen these threads before.
You can sit here and talk about how great something used to be and how it's all shit now
Or we can make this thread more useful and talk about how it could have been prevented. Can an internet community exist that is immune to the sort of things that ruin communities like 4chan? (or usenet >>462484 )
>>462479
2005
>depressed man who is so ashamed of himself he smokes 5 cigarettes a day and downs an entire bottle of alcohol while wearing a paper bag to hide his shame
2016
>college students having fun
It's almost as if you're trying to make 2016 look good.
>>462682
4chan tried it's best to prevent this. /b/ acts quite well as a containment board for new friends and prevents them from shitting up more proper boards but ultimately there were to many of them and they were able to spread.
The only way of preventing this almost envetiable death through normification is to remain unpopular and generally unknown.
>>462682
Not if your site is good and relies on community-created content. If it's good, it gains popularity. If it gains popularity, it will gain users rapidly. If it gains users rapidly, they will soon be the majority and will establish new rules. On the bright side, now you have a bad site so it won't grow so fast anymore.
>>462685
>>462687
Everyone always says it can't be done, but I'm still not completely convinced.
Maybe a 100% perfect solution is impossible, but what about something that makes it all just "good enough".
Take anonymity for example. I'm pretty sure moot just left that as a feature because it was already in the japanese code he was using, but it turns out that it's actually quite effective at minimizing attention seeking posts.
What if there are other features, maybe even too subtle to be obvious, that we haven't thought of yet where no matter how popular the site got it would still be relatively effective at minimizing the damage? Not perfectly, but just "good enough"?
>>462689
Well, we had built-in annoyances that scared people off with how inconvenient they were. No built-in catalog, noko, no replies next to the post numbers and a billion other things that made you get extensions or suffer through them. Impenetrable interface usually keeps people at bay, but moot unfortunately got rid of it. Still, 4chan kept growing rapidly even with those present. Hell, we have the most annoying thing in existence now, Google's piece of shit captchas, and they don't really scare off anyone.
>>462697
That reminds me of another thing I thought might have contributed to the noise.
Thread auto-updates.
I think that's probably largely responsible for the transition from a forum-like atmosphere to a chatroom-like atmosphere.
It all went downhill after project chanology brought media attention to the site
t. oldfag
>>462713
t. anybody who has read ED
>>462716
Speaking of which, the current state of ED is pitiful. That site died harder than this place ever could.
It died when people started coming here expecting a new ebin meem every couple of posts. Since this isn't how it works, they resort to shitposting to get cheap laughs.
>>462716
>>462971
>ED
>>462687
>If it gains popularity, it will gain users rapidly. If it gains users rapidly, they will soon be the majority and will establish new rules
Controlled user growth would work. Maybe limit the amount of post a new user is allowed daily or something like that.
Hard thing is timing it right.
>>462682
First of all, those two posters are hipster faggots.
We came here for the content and the posts, we didn't come here to be some underground special snowflake festival.
take your special snowflake syndrome back to tumbler.
Second this site was ruined because most of you fools couldn't keep your mouths shut. Rules 1 & 2 were broken nonstop. THAT is why this site has several infestations now.
