Why is streaming anime considered cancerous? And music, movies, TV shows, etc?
It isn't. Do whatever you want, and stop worrying about what is or isn't cancer. Nobody outside of this shithole gives a fuck.
>>564907
This.
Two reasons
1. You're not living your life correctly, i.e. not watching a show through a medium under adequate conditions, which hinders you from getting a full experience.
2.
>The quality of posts is extremely important to this community. Contributors are encouraged to provide high-quality images and informative comments.
Once in a while you may feel you want to post a snapshot, so if the video quality is bad the image quality will be bad. If you post shitty images you're a shitty poster.
>>564922
Only a virgin weeb would describe anime as an 'experience'. Its not, you know. Its a fucking cartoon.
>>564923
Even taking a shit is an experience. You don't wipe your ass with sandpaper because it delivers a poor shitting experience.
>>564924
>He doesn't wipe his ass with sandpaper
spotted the redditor
Because the video is of an objectively lower quality, and lower quality is bad, especially when it can be quantified.
Still, I'll sometimes stream, if I just want a lighter experience, or if I want to check a show out.
>>564924
Its a fucking cartoon. Funny that shit was the first thing that came to your mind, did you just watch some anime?
>>564929
I suppose if you find taking a shit more edifying than watching a cartoon that's up to you.
>>564930
I dunno, I've taken some pretty enjoyable shits in my time desu
>>564923
Any moment is an experience. I don't think you should leave it solely to your bias to decide what's true or not.
>>564927
underrated post desu
>>564923
Why would you post about anime if you don't like it then?
Anime is perfect
>>564897
It is only cancerous if you are forced to do so. If your preference is to steam content instead of downloading it, do it and don't care about what anyone else says. At the end of the day it is individual personal entertainment and you're the only fuck who gets to experience it so you may as well do so on your own terms.
I prefer not to stream due to many personal reasons but if someone prefers to do so, I'm not going to try and convince him to change is behaviour to suit my preferences. That is a sure sign of an inability to empathise and really, really fucking autistic. Those retards who shit up threads over streaming or over which media software an anon decides to use are complete fucking spergs.
>>564922
>Once in a while you may feel you want to post a snapshot, so if the video quality is bad the image quality will be bad. If you post shitty images you're a shitty poster.
The only board which you should be concerned about this is on /p/. This is fucking discussion board and images are merely added flavour to a post. They may as well be large numb nails.
If you want to care about quality of drawn images and art, fuck off to one of the image dump boards. You know, not /a/, for starters.
Care less about an image used and more about the quality of the content posted. A high quality image doesn't magically improve a post with all the insights of a teenager. It's basically shallow window dressing for retards who lack the creativity to communicate and discuss things.
>>565304
It's fine to wallow in mediocrity, but I don't think you should encourage indolent behaviour. It's not a matter of pure preference because downloading and then watching a show in a tweaked media player is objectively superior to streaming.
It's not rocket science to install the necessary software and neither is the time needed to automate the regular download process of airing shows hefty, so I do believe that the minimal effort required is something that can be solicited.
It's only excusable to stream if you lack the means to do otherwise, e.g. horrible bandwidth speed.
As for the second point: you can trivialize the importance of images all you want but this is in fact an imageboard. That means that images are most certainly important, important enough to warrant a standard as proved by the fact that global rule #6 exists, which states that "Contributors are encouraged to provide high-quality images".
Bumping a thread with discussion due to the flooding happening right now. uy
Long quality posts in this thread.
Bump.
Because it's casual. Downloading media files requires you to at least understand a little bit about playback and computer files. Also in the case of private trackers or IRC requires you to be part of a community. I think that's the real reason streaming used to be frowned upon, at least on /a/. Streaming was just associated with normalfags, and this is probably why streaming became more accepted on /a/ lately, there's more casual users in general.
Streaming per se isn't bad though. As technology progresses the quality is going to get better. Streaming is the future of media playback. Even diehards like Daiz promote streaming.
>>564897
Because the irony is, one you get torrenting figured out and set up, it's immensely easier and more convenient than streaming. At first glance streaming does seem easier: just click and watch. But problems do crop up, and with RSS feeds you don't even have to click anything, it's all done for you. You do save a lot of time by downloading it properly.
And of course, the picture quality is incomparably better through downloading. Now, I'm sure there are some people who manage to find sites that have decent -- but still inferior -- quality, but most streamers are content (read: clueless) enough to watch appallingly grainy and low-res garbage. Call it a stereotype, it's still true.
Since the best sense of elitism is preferring the better to the worse, it is healthy to be elitist toward streamers. They're okay with objectively worse content. They're not obligated to prefer the better. But I'm not obligated to take them seriously.
