Can we all agree that so called "generals" are cancer?
They only clock up the boards with always the same pasta OP and the threads themselves are nothing but reddit tier circlejerks. Most of it is no on-topic discussion, and once the social circle of the "general" is established, newfags are not even welcome anymore to post in these threads.
Generals are a perfectly fine compromise to the cancer that would otherwise actually be clogging your board. They make it easy to ignore or even filter.
I feel like you haven't put much thought into your point of view.
>>546561
>go to any board
>have scroll past a gorillion "generals" before I find a thread worth reading
Yeah, nah, fuck off.
>the cancer that would otherwise actually be clogging your board
None of that is mitigated by generals.
>>546488
Indeed we can.
>>546561
We already have a "compromise" board. It's called /soc/ and you're welcome to go there for the "generals" or get off of 4chan.
>>546561
>space on any board is inherently limited
>people think their topic deserves a pemanent place on the board
>everyone starts making generals for their topic
>soon entire board is nothing but generals
Make a topic when you have something to say about it, not just because you need your hugbox open 24/7.
>>546604
>>soon entire board is nothing but generals
This is actually what happened to /mlp/. It was once the fastest growing board in 2011-2012 and now if you go there, you will get the impression that the board is dead, except it isn't -- the people left on that board are all posting in generals. Whether you like ponies or not is irrelevant -- /mlp/ is a good example of what happens when you allow generals on a board.
General threads do a strange thing to a board, things which I personally dislike to the point I would rather generals wiped from the face of any board not designed to hold them, in spite of their useful headers. Generals exist, in effect as their own seperate sub board taking in those that are interested and removing those that don't. This may on the surface seem preferable but a closer examination will show this to be far more detremental to any board.
Most notably, it cuts down on seperate non-general threads to a large degree. For some this will be due to people claiming these topics belong in whatever vague general it pertains. Others will simply move into their prefered generals and never leave them, bar unusual circumstance. This kind of pidgeonholing cuts down on the effective number of board users and will force a decrease in quality to the board overall.
The worst part of these general threads however, is the insipid belief that they should be up and running 24/7 with no downtime at any point. No matter how interesting or indepth the subject matter, eventually there will be nothing left to actually discuss, no one new will enter the generals. Afterall, any actual questions will invariably be answered by the header pastebins, and the whole thread will devolve into circlejerk blog posting at best or shitposting bumps at worst.
If you think this unfair, go find a general you hold no interest in, something that has not gotten any new content in a while and see for yourself how much ontopic content is being generated.
"General" threads that contribute no new content should be treated as request threads and deleted, like they do on the image dump boards.
>>546621
Mods like them however, because they can hang out with a specific circle of anons and blog and talk and shitpost a little bit.
>>546618
I couldn't say it better myself. Generals go completely against the very nature of 4chan, or any imageboard. If generals were intended behaviour, there wouldn't be bump limits and limited board spaces. To keep things fresh and on-topic threads are routinely pruned, and generals are a slap in the face to the whole system that should frankly be banned.
That's not to say that one topic can't be discussed multiple times, but really only so long as it's relevant, and ideally only when the OP actually has something to say about it.
>>546622
People in generals are never "anons". When someone tells me to "go post in the general," I usually take that as a cue to leave the board because trying to discuss anything in generals is usually futile, as these threads are filled to the brim with tripfags and LOL I'M A GURL posters who should be in tinychat who aren't even discussing the topic.
>>546624
Can't be helped. It proves that the need for socializing is greater than wanting to discuss a topic in earnestly.
>>546626
It can be helped by banning generals. Then these people will either go to /soc/ or take it to IRC instead of shitting up the board.
>>546626
>Can't be helped.
Yes it can. They should be banned and sent to reddit, or facebook, or literally any other site that supports that kind of posting, and banned from this one. The site uses anonymous posting for a reason.
>>546561
Absolute shitpost. OP is correct.
>>546576
>go to any board's catalog
>put all generals on your filter
>never have to see content you dislike that's conveniently condensed in one place
But I'm sure you'd rather have that kind of thing spread all over your board, right? Look at all the Overwatch shit going on in /v/ at the moment and you might get a taste of what the other option is.
Sorry, but no, removing all content you dislike is not feasible.
By the way, sorry, but there's nothing wrong with recurring threads either. If any given thread is full of reddit-tier circlejerks and no on-topic discussion, that's because the people who like that subject are huge faggots, not because it's a general. The same thing would happen if they had scattered threads instead of generals.
>>546561
No, fuck off. Generals don't belong on 4chan.
>>546793
>Look at all the Overwatch shit going on in /v/ at the moment and you might get a taste of what the other option is.
Anyone complaining about Overwatch is either new to 4chan or is an idiot. It IS the way 4chan functions and containment is the greatest cancer on 4chan. You also shouldn't have the ability to hide away things you don't like. You should be forced to view it on 4chan in all its glory and grow the fuck up and just ignore it.
Generals in their very concept are cancer and do not function on 4chan.
>/toy/ was a great board where everyone would post badass stuff and other people would be enticed to get into that toylime
>generalfags appear
>they start sage spamming any thread that isnt a general
>now everyone shit talks each others toylines and hardly anyone hears about new releases unless they religiously follow links in he OPs of a dozen different eternal threads
>all the fun photo threads we used to have are gone
Fuck generals
>>546622
Mods also like generals because it makes it easier to moderate. For example, there is a certain off topic general on /a/ which is mostly full of cancerous shitposting and normalfaggotry pertaining to discussions which have nothing to do with anime or manga, but mods know these shitters will rarely if ever leave their little hugbox so they can safely ignore the threads and delete shitposts once a blue moon in order to fool the generalfags into believing that the hotpockets favour their general. It's win-win for the sort of scum who don't belong here and lose-lose for everyone else.
The worst part is that I usually visit that general at least once a day and try to find or generate discussion, as it isn't really discussed anywhere else on the site. I guess that would make me a generalfag of a sort but if I had the option, I'd nuke it off the planet, along with every other general thread. In a regular group of say 100 posters, you'd be lucky to have 5 or 6 anons as a regular part of the thread who are half decent. Those are usually the anons however who try to discuss things, which anger the autists, and end up becoming scapegoats for the everything wrong with the thread. Every general has their small handful of scapegoats the delusional paranoid autists blame for everything, regardless of whether or not it is based on an actual anon or something entirely conjured from delusion.
Generals could be made significantly better if OP images could not be repeated until the thread is no longer on the site archive, the Robot was unleashed site wide for thread OPs, and that linking to google documents and pastebins were flagged as spam is the same URL appeared more than an arbitrary amount of time, say in the same manner as banning the repeated use of the same OP image before the thread was pruned not from the board but from the internal board archive, meaning it would be at least a matter of days before the spergs could mindlessly copypaste their shit.
It depends, I sometimes will check out the metal general on /mu/ for recs, but generals where it's all waifu posting of fan-art are lame as fuck
>>546814
Use the right one, dumbass
>>546962
Fuck off generalfag.
>>546966
What are you gonna do, type in all-caps at us? Use a lot of exclamation points? Threaten us? You have no power here, lord of the cries.
>>546969
Stop it anon, you'll kill someone with so much autism.
>>546973
That's what I thought. You can't do anything. All you can do is sniffle like a bitch, because you have no power. I'll be chilling in my general, you can go threaten to sue Hiro
>>546988
My bad, I see now that you're a funny guy.
>>546576
>scroll past
do you not know how to use the catalogue or something? The longest you could scroll through any catalogue is 3 seconds and any thread you don't want to look at you can hide with a click
Are so new that you don't remember the pony invasion that spawned generals in the first place or so old that you literally never found out about the catalogue and 4chan X?
>>547021
>do you not know how to use the catalogue or something?
Ignore cancer allows it to spread.
>Are so new
Nigger you have no fucking place to call any other fag new, especially when your "experience" is copypasted from internet meme history sites. Drink bleach you fucking faget.
>>547184
>exaggerated
You fucking wish.
>>547021
>ignoring the problem makes it go away
Don't be retarded.
Generals work on some boards like /sp/ very well.
Given that I only browse /sp/, /pol/, /qa/, and /gif/ I can't really say much though.
>>546488
>They only clock up the boards with always the same pasta OP and the threads themselves are nothing but reddit tier circlejerks.
the generals on /out/ are pretty on topic desu
>>547881
>Generals work on some boards like /sp/ very well.
No they don't, generals killed everything good about the board.
I thought they were cancer since their first incarnation
However, theyve become such a part of 4chan culture that it would cause a huge backlash to ban them now.
There's people who dont really browse 4chan, they just come for a specific general. It's a sort of self-contained cancer, but when everyone and their grandma wants to create their own hugbox on a board, it clutters things up.
/vg/ was a mistake
>>546488
There is literally nothing wrong with generals (at least in concept, some of them are pretty bad but others are okay). Just to be clear, I'm assuming we're talking about eternal generals devoted to discussing an interest as opposed to threads about a general topic that get posted occasionally and explicit containment generals like the "stupid question threads" on /sci/ and /g/.
>They only clock up the boards with always the same pasta OP
So what? It's to prevent people from clogging up the thread with stupid questions. The only way I can see a long OP being an inconvenience to someone who doesn't browse that general is if you actually use the pages of 4chan instead of using the catalog. But who still does that?
Admittedly, I prefer when the OP is something unique that raises a talking point for the thread, but it's fine either way.
>the threads themselves are nothing but reddit tier circlejerks
It's true that there is more of a social aspect to generals. There are fewer users, so it's more common for certain people to become recognizable and develop a reputation, often without even using a tripcode. However, this is no different from how it works on small boards and in my experience it rarely threatens to overtake the actual discussion of the general's subject, although I recognize there are many generals on the site that I've never visited that you could be basing your impressions on.
>Most of it is no on-topic discussion, and once the social circle of the "general" is established, newfags are not even welcome anymore to post in these threads.
The same critique can apply to any board on 4chan, general culture is just a microcosm of board culture. Doesn't most of 4chan pride itself on having an esoteric culture and being unwelcoming to newfags? As in the case of boards, unless you display ignorance of the general's subject or a failure to understand its culture and memes, there's no way for other users to identify you as a newfag.
cont.
>>546488
>>547975
In fact, I would actually say that most generals are more welcoming of people who are new to their subject matter than the majority of the board they inhabit; most people seem to delight in explaining their favorite show/game/hobby to an interested outsider.
I feel like it's necessary to offer this kind of defense of generals because few people seem to be willing to do so (except with a "lesser of two evils" sort of defense like the one offered by >>546561) despite the obvious fact that large numbers of people use them. I think this is because it's perceived to be in conflict with the dominant culture of 4chan, but the truth is they fit perfectly. 4chan is a place where people discuss their interests (in addition to posting porn and doing other things) and if the users of a board constantly want to discuss something then of course there should be and will be constant threads about it. /a/ has nonstop Eva threads, they just don't call it a general even though it is (the current one >>>/a/142239577 appears to have actually turned out to be a religious debate thread but based on the OP it's clearly intended as an Eva general) and nobody complains about it, because the truth is there's nothing wrong with it.
>>547975
>There is literally nothing wrong with generals
Except the fact they in their very nature and concept go against everything that is 4chan in all forms.
Eva threads aren't generals either, you clearly don't even know what a general is.
>>547977
>Except the fact they in their very nature and concept go against everything that is 4chan in all forms.
Wow, epic.
>Eva threads aren't generals either,
Yeah, they really are. I've visited many and the OP is usually just a pretext to talk about the show and movies IN GENERAL rather than the whole thread being about the specific content of the OP post.
>>547980
>Wow, epic.
Great argument, fucktard. Is it because you can't argue against it? Generals to their very core concept go against 4chan itself and actually fight against the basic natures and systems of 4chan just to live and survive. The thread and bump limits shit exist for the purpose of stopping stuff like generals.
It's not like I use the damn things, but, I don't see EVA threads as generals. The OPs are always different, the threads aren't always constant, the few times I've gone into them its clearly been different people and people aren't trying to desperately to keep them alive. They aren't generals, it is just simply an incredibly popular topic that is guaranteed to get regular threads and the nature of the series allows it to always have something new to talk about as new people watch the show.
Also, OP isn't a topic setter, he is a conversation starter. You aren't meant to be talking about the specific content in OPs post. He initiates the conversation, where it goes, nobody knows.
>>547986
>The thread and bump limits shit exist for the purpose of stopping stuff like generals.
You got a quote from moot or Hiro saying that? Otherwise it's bullshit.
>>547995
No, its how it is mechanically designed. You don't need a quote from someone to look at how something works and functions.
>>547997
It seems obvious to me that the bump limit and thread limit are just there to keep threads from getting too long. Imagine if a popular general or a thread about some major event that the whole board wanted to talk about was just one thread. There would eventually be tens or hundreds of thousands of posts and you'd have to load all that every time you opened the thread. Better to let it die and start a new one.
>>548005
You mean how regular forums work? You want a general, go to any other site, that is how they all function. If 4chan really wanted to, it could prune older posts except for the OP and leave the thread alive forever, but it doesn't, because there isn't meant to be an eternal topic forever gathering dust on the board.
>>547977
>Except the fact they in their very nature and concept go against everything that is 4chan in all forms.
So you mean that the equivalent of multiple boards for different interests goes against everything in 4chan? Okay. And would you say that stickies and other threads that attract a large amount of attention from the board and thus easily reach bump limit (and beyond) are problematic too? What about threads that get remade often because there are enough people willing to talk about it, should they all get banned as well because only one thread per subject should be allowed and if it reaches bump limit, too bad?
And ultimately, it's the people using any board who decide how to use it - if they want to keep talking about something for more than 500 posts, why shouldn't they be allowed to? The "nature of 4chan" also includes being free to do whatever within the boundaries of a board, you know, and that obviously includes talking about something pertaining to that board. If you want to ban anything, ban necrobumpers who add absolutely nothing to any given thread.
>>548136
You're a fucking idiot.
>>548138
You're a fucking idiot.
>>548142
I'm not the fucktard who ignored what was said and decided to strawman instead.
>>548143
>strawman
Did they change the meaning of that word to "argument I disagree with" recently?
>>548146
I don't see how anything you said has anything to do with the notion that generals mechanically and culturally go against 4chan in everyway? Yes, it was a strawman because you were trying to 'argue' against my point without fucking addressing it at all.
>>548148
>mechanically
Did you miss the part about "the equivalent of multiple boards for different interests"? The only point about them that would technically go against part of 4chan is how often they get created (and recreated), but even that doesn't mean shit because recurring threads have always existed. You're just copying what moot said.
>culturally
But they're part of 4chan's culture by now, as well. They've been so ever since someone decided to make recurring threads more often than the usual on /v/, which convinced moot to create /vg/ because there was no official catalog back then. Today, they only get such a bad reputation because /vg/ attracted tons of outsiders and retards, but that was mostly because certain popular games attract people like that by nature itself.
Once again, there's nothing wrong with people who want to talk about one subject in particular in any given board, because after all that's exactly why threads exist in first place. If people want to keep talking about that they're free to do so, and the only part about those threads that could be punished in any way is how they tend to get necrobumped.
>>548161
>"the equivalent of multiple boards for different interests"
Except, threads aren't fucking multiple boards. Your comparison is shit and isn't valid. I'm also sure as hell not copying what moot said, even if he was right. I developed my opinion myself, like most people who hate generals. They were hated since their very inception on 4chan and for good reason. I've hated them since my first experience with them and over time, that opinion has only developed MORE REASONS as to why I don't like them. They go against the very way 4chan operates. Generals aren't 4chan, they are traditional forum culture. Look, there is even a image posted in this thread for this. >>546810
No, they aren't apart of 4chan. They never were. They were detested by the userbase since they very beginning and the mods and admin have voiced against them over the years multiple times and tried to get rid of them multiple times. They aren't apart of 4chan culture, they are something that forced themselves in unwelcomed when no one wanted them, refuse to leave and force their culture on everyone else. Don't fucking try saying it's 4chan culture when it was something rejected by the majority of the userbase since they came and still are rejected. They are something that has been forced, not something that has came naturally.
>>546561
>/this/ general
>/that/ general
>/stupud shit/ general
>/special snowflake general/
>/muh tripfag circlejerk/ general
Etc. This is present in just about every board. It clogs the boards and makes good threads 404. Your argument is invalid. If there is a problem, a site (like /a/'s buyfag generals) should be made and put in the board's sticky (if they don't have a general sticky, then the board automatically sucks.)
/vg/ is the board for video game generals but some of the generals there do baffle me like Katawa Shoujo General one of the reasons /vg/ was made. There's nothing to discuss anymore yet it's been up for 2-3 years now.
>>546488
It's funny because if there weren't generals OP would be crying about a billion random posts flooding his board.
>>548177
>2. If there's already a thread on the topic you make a side-post in that one
>3. After there isn't anything left to discuss in that topic, it slows down and you move on
See, that's exactly what happens in the so-called generals I see. If people keep bumping any thread despite nobody being interested in it at the moment they're the ones who should be punished, and if threads continue to receive tons of posts every minute that's because people want to talk about their subject (and thus it makes all fucking sense in the world that they'd make a new thread, because they want to keep talking about it). The rest of the post you mentioned is about as flanderized as >>546814 and thus doesn't mean anything, as one case doesn't mean anything. If people from that certain "general" behave as poorly as described then you should punish them, not globally ban recurring discussion about popular matters because holy fuck that would be retarded.
>>548184
>It clogs the boards and makes good threads 404.
Wrong. You know what clogs a board and makes good threads 404? Uncontained threads about popular things getting spammed all day. If you're talking about /a/, surely you remember how the board got during Kill la Kill's airing, right?
>>548212
>would be crying about a billion random posts flooding his board.
No he wouldn't.
>>548215
But I thought he doesn't want to see boards getting flooded with one thing.
>>548213
>See, that's exactly what happens in the so-called generals I see.
>not globally ban recurring discussion about popular matters
Apparently you don't even know what a fucking general is. That doesn't happen in any single general on 4chan. On-top of that, the concept of generals literally implies you don't do that.
> The rest of the post you mentioned is about as flanderized as
More like you can't argue against it, fucktard. In addition that image is the perfect description of the end-goal of all generals. ALL GENERALS. FUCKING ALL OF THEM ACT LIKE THAT. IT ISN'T A USERBASE THING, THE CONCEPT OF GENERAL ITSELF ENCOURAGES THAT BEHAVIOUR.
>f you're talking about /a/, surely you remember how the board got during Kill la Kill's airing, right?
There was never anything wrong with this shit and only idiots have ever complained about it. It is the way 4chan fucking functions. No wonder you are so much in support of fucking generals, you don't even like 4chan. Pic related is the normal state of how 4chan runs.
>>548222
>There was never anything wrong with this shit and only idiots have ever complained about it.
Exactly. Generalfags seem to think that an event causing an entire board to shit itself is somehow bad and wrong and should be stopped at all costs, except this shit is what made 4chan fun in the first place. If you don't like or have no interest in the current shitstorm, then fuck off a few days, or hell even a few hours, it'll be over soon.
>>548222
That's the fucking point, I've seen people calling threads about shows airing in a season as generals much more than once. How can you say that our amazing moderation team knows exactly what is a general and what isn't? How can you say that any person on 4chan knows the difference between a general and a normal, popular thread that focuses on one thing? "It's bad and has a tag" doesn't mean shit.
>FUCKING ALL OF THEM ACT LIKE THAT.
Do you really browse all generals across the entirety of 4chan to be able to say such a thing? There are good threads and bad threads everywhere, you know. One example does not make a fucking rule.
>There was never anything wrong with this shit
I recall seeing even that faggot moot himself telling /jp/ to condense their shit once. What's wrong with trying to keep discussion organized? Even when threads get spammed like that, most of the discussion focuses itself on only one thread as well because how else would people try to talk about anything?
>>547184
>extremely exaggerated
If anything it's understated.
>>547980
>Wow, epic.
Try to come up with an argument.
I mean, I know you don't fucking have one, but at least try.
>>548233
>That's the fucking point, I've seen people calling threads about shows airing in a season as generals much more than once.
Except, that is correct. They CAN BE generals. Just because its airing, it doesn't mean it isn't a general. It still has to fit certain criteria to be a general and most airing shows these days sure as hell become generals. Do you even use /a/? Most of the popular airing shows these days with their threads are basically no different to bloody generals. The only reason that people don't call them as such is because they generally aren't on airing day and because they are airing shows. Remove the airing part and they may as well be in how they function and how the posts flow in them.
There is a very very distinctive difference between polite posting etiquette and fucking forcing people to condense themselves because you are an idiot. On top of that, yes this is going to get me shot, keeping discussion organized on 4chan isn't 4chan. It is chaotic as fuck and its how the sites system is built and its how the culture has been built. There is no reason to keep shit organized or to contain shit, its stupid.
>most of the discussion focuses itself on only one thread as well because how else would people try to talk about anything?
Except when that doesn't happen? At best it happens for the FIRST thread for release date and that depends on the show and what happens. Most threads on 4chan have always ran like pic related. OP isn't a topic setter, he is a conversation starter. People used to click on a thread for the last three posts, people now click for whichever one has the OP that interests them the most. So, no, people still don't concentrate on a single thread. Those 50 spammed threads will also be more interesting and fun then every single general has ever been with their repetitive nature. THAT is how people talk about shit.
>>548249
So, once again, what is the difference between a general and a thread about any topic in particular? Ignore necrobumpers, as everyone knows they're faggots, and don't say anything about going off-topic because as you said that's part of what makes 4chan itself.
And you know, just because 4chan has always been chaotic doesn't mean it needs to stay like that all the time. The catalog makes it extremely easy to find things you're interested in while ignoring what you don't give a fuck about, not everyone enjoys endlessly F5ing page 1 and this behavior didn't start with 4chan's catalog as neet.tv existed long before that got added.
Only butthurt /a/utists and newfags trying to fit in hate generals
Another anon in favour of removing generals.
My thought for a while has been to create a sub-board for each board, similar to how textboards were. So for example, at the top of /mu/ will be a link to /mug/, or at the top of /sp/ will be a link to /spg/
I hate generals but you can easily filter them so I don't really care
>>546488
I wish some fucking moderation would be shown on /tv/, there's a fucking Game of Thrones general that gets ignored, and the entire board is rife with GoT threads. The first two seasons, GoT was the cancer killing /tv/, then in the third and fourth, the general fixed it. Now these past two seasons have made it go to shit again.
>>546618
>Most notably, it cuts down on seperate non-general threads to a large degree. For some this will be due to people claiming these topics belong in whatever vague general it pertains. Others will simply move into their prefered generals and never leave them, bar unusual circumstance. This kind of pidgeonholing cuts down on the effective number of board users and will force a decrease in quality to the board overall.
/tg/ is a perfect example of this effect. Back in the days you'd just browse the pages and get bombarded with various topics concerning many different RPG systems. You quickly learned a lot about tabletop and many titles you wouldn't have heard about otherwise caught your interest. Nowadays every fucking RPG has its own eternal general and all discussion about it disappeared from the main board. You have to monitor and read a trillion of those to search for some discussion that would interest you.
Hell, some people even sage and redirect anyone who dared post a system-specific topic to the appropriate general. It's killing the board.
>>549628
It's the same everywhere sadly. Take /sp/ for example. Try to make a thread about a football/soccer player being transferred and the only replies you get are people telling you to take it to the transfer window/league/club general. Really sad and people won't bust out of it. I genuinely think they need to be forbidden, and I'm a guy who is extremely irritated by heavy-handed moderation.
>>546488
it's just that they don't even do the thing they're supposed to do which is contain the discussion of a subject to one thread. every time there's a new game of plebs episode /tv/ turns into /got/ and the mods do nothing about it. there will also be two or even three concurrent /got/ generals sometimes
>and that linking to google documents and pastebins were flagged as spam is the same URL appeared more than an arbitrary amount of time
I lurk buyfag threads every once in a while since I occasionally partake in the practice, and they're pretty devoid of cancer since new figs and merchandise come out almost daily. I'd say that they're one of the best "generals" out there since there's always discussion and most posts are on topic. It also casts a large enough net to not let the cancer fester with the same trips and anons.
>>550010
This. A general's quality is highly related to how often new shit to talk about comes out. 24/7 generals about comics with new chapters monthly and little else turn into cancerous chatrooms far more often than generals for shit that has weekly+ updates.
Are regular threads that happen only once a week still generals?
>>550781
I think by 'general' people mean eternal generals that are constantly up, and a new thread made as soon as the bump limit is hit.
>>550784
So the threads that hit bump limit then fall off the board before the new thread is up doesn't count as a general?
>>550784
Some generals go a few days between threads due to general lack of shit to talk about.
>>550781
There is a difference between regular threads made to actually talk about something and a general.
>>550781
Any thread that only talks about one thing is a general.
>>550799
By that logic /tg/ has a lot of unmarked Warhammer generals.
>>550792
What's the difference
>>551621
The discussion in a general very quickly becomes offtopic.
Make /cog/
>>546488
We CAN all agree, sure. But we won't because we don't. And we're not going to ALL agree. Not on ANYTHING. There is not a SINGLE. THING. that all of 4chan is going to agree on. Not one.
Sorry, OP.
>>555056
Would /tv/ cape threads go there too?
>>553491
So basically you just don't like off-topic discussion
>>555136
Yes. There are other boards and other sites or the internet relay channel that are better suited for it.
>>555189
Well that's more a user problem than necessarily a thread problem. Slow moving generals tend to be fine.
>>555136
No fucking shit, keeping to the topic should always be a priority. Sure, some threads can derail sometimes without it being a big issue or whatever. But it should never be the default state like it becomes eventually in generals. Where people post just to keep the thread alive, where the thread gets recreated even before it gets archived just because THERE MUST ALWAYS BE A THREAD. It's insanity.
