Gaming World Forums

General Category => General Talk => Topic started by: the_bub_from_the_pit on July 11, 2008, 04:41:33 pm

Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: the_bub_from_the_pit on July 11, 2008, 04:41:33 pm
http://wsj.com/article/SB121564928060441097.html?mod=fpa_mostpop

Quote
Creating viral videos and concepts has become a keystone for many businesses marketing online.

Such Web phenomena are known by technophiles as "memes." Coined by biologist Richard Dawkins in his 1976 book "The Selfish Gene," a meme is a unit of cultural information -- an idea, a practice, a phrase, or an online video --that's passed on virally. Although sometimes frivolous, every word-of-mouth marketer dreams of creating memorable memes that will catapult their product or client to fame.

Over the last few years, 4chan.org has become one of the most talked-about sites when it comes to launching new memes. After appearing on the site, "LOLcats," humorous images of cats with loud text beneath them in a fake language called "LOLspeak", stormed the Web last year. (For example, instead of saying "hello," the cats would say "oh hai.") Another phrase "So I herd u like mudkips," a reference to a sea creature from the popular animated show "Pokémon," spawned thousands of tribute videos on YouTube. 4chan.org began as a simple message board with pictures and text. It was started by Christopher Poole in his Long Island bedroom in 2003 when he was 15 years old. Since then it has grown to more than 3 million monthly users, according to Mr. Poole.

One of the site's most popular memes is an online bait-and-switch known as the "Rick Roll." Here's how it works: A friend sends an email suggesting you take a peek at an "amazing" online video and passes along the link. You follow the link, but instead of the video you expect, you've been sent to the music video of Rick Astley's "Never Gonna Give You Up," a hit song from 1988. Over the past year, Rick Rolling has become an online sensation, pushing Mr. Astley's video past 16 million views on YouTube.

4chan is a quaint throwback to the earliest Web pages that have since been eclipsed in the newest iterations of the Web. While other Web sites focus on flashy-social networking features and eye-catching advertisements, 4chan's design is archaic and the color scheme is two-tone. Each page on 4chan features photos and text. One user will post an image of something to start a discussion on one of the more than 40 different subject areas spanning origami and automobiles. Other users follow up with responses or requests for more images.

"It's like Craigslist -- hugely simple and highly useful," says David Weinberger, a fellow at Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet and Society. 4chan's utility is its ability to gather millions of people in conversation in a single place and create a "meme-rich" environment, says Mr. Weinberger.

Last September, Ben Huh and a team of investors purchased "I Can Has Cheezburger," a site that aggregated the "LOLcats." Mr. Huh hopes to turn the 4chan-generated tradition into a meme empire with several other related sites in the works. The site now has more than 2.5 million unique visitors a month, according to Mr. Huh, and a book based on the site is coming this fall for Gotham Books.

Mr. Poole originally just wanted a place to share his fascination with Japanese comics and television shows. He was a fan of the popular Japanese image Web site 2chan and wanted to create a version for American audiences. With his mother's approval, he used her credit card to purchase server space and started 4chan.org.

oon, running 4chan became a full-time job. He hired a programmer (based on his skill playing online Tetris) and recruited a team of active community members to serve as moderators. "It was a struggle to get him to turn off his computer," says Tom Poole, Mr. Poole's father, who says his son built a computer with a water-cooling system as a teen. "He's a bit obsessive."

A large part of the site's success is its emphasis on anonymity. Users are not required to provide a working email address or any other personal information, a standard practice for other online communities like Facebook or MySpace. Mr. Poole uses the codename "moot" and says that he's never revealed his connection to the site until The Wall Street Journal inquired. "I have a firewall between my two lives," he says.

Mr. Poole says that anonymity encourages unfettered creativity. But it also removes individual accountability as some posts can veer into hurtful or profane territories. "Shock posts," or graphic images of violence or sex, occasionally mar the largest general interest board known as " /b/ ." Mr. Poole has a disclaimer that he wrote so that users "don't post anything that violates U.S. or international law." He says a lawyer reviewed the notice, but concedes, "I'm sure they don't have much legal clout behind them."

"They get rowdy -- it's like a bar without alcohol," says Willard Ling, a moderator and long-time user of the site. "It's like that psychological concept of deinvidualization -- when groups of people become less aware of their own responsibility." Mr. Poole and his team of moderators have handed out 70,000 bans over the last three years, but preventing long-term abuse can be difficult.

4chan's "Wild West" reputation has created a dilemma for Mr. Poole. While it's brought him Internet fame, albeit through his alter ego, and created enviable traffic, he has trouble selling ads to more cautious companies who don't want their ads appearing next to potentially graphic content. He's attempted to quarantine sexual material on a set of adult boards, but that doesn't stop pornography or other adult content from appearing elsewhere.

Max Goldberg, owner of You're The Man Now Dog, a similar community with about 230,000 registered users and a focus on animated videos, says dealing with mature content is a problem for any site that allows its users creative license. "On the Web, you either have clean content or you have pornography. People upload both, but they don't want to buy pornography, because they can get it for free," says Mr. Goldberg. Even a small percentage of racy or blue content can ruin a site's image with advertisers, he says.

4chan's growing pains are part of a larger issue: how to turn a wave of online traffic into a viable business. "That's been an uphill battle for me personally. My biggest time spent has been convincing companies in marketing potential in 4chan but no one sees eye to eye," says Mr. Poole.

Part of 4chan's problem is counting how many users are on the site. Many advertisers look at third-party Web-measurement companies like comScore to determine a site's overall traffic and demographic information. Currently, comScore says 4chan only has around about 796,000 unique visitors a month globally, a more than threefold difference from 4chan's claims. ComScore says that it uses a Nielsen-like system to track Web traffic.

Mr. Poole says that comScore's demographic data is correct, but disagrees with their traffic data, arguing that panel-based data is flawed. "It's a generalization," he says of comScore's figures, "Our users are hard to pinpoint."

In contrast to other startups that have amassed millions of dollars in seed money from investors, 4chan is a modest operation. Mr. Poole makes money from advertising and the occasional donation drive. He says the site breaks even, but won't release the site's revenue figures. His only paid staff member is his programmer. "He makes more money than I do," says Mr. Poole.

oh God.  This is one of the few things I'd never have expected to pop up in the WSJ... It's pretty funny how they over glorify the GREAT INTERNET TEEN SUBCULTURE but not realize how completely awful it is. I can honestly see a bunch of businessmen logging on to 4chan and going "heh heh time to bring myself back to my youOH GOD WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS".
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Vellfire on July 11, 2008, 04:46:39 pm
Holy shit.  People should send them in screenshots of 4chan because they sure as hell didn't go there themselves.

You have to be kidding me if you think 4chan is CRAIGSLIST also
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: goldenratio on July 11, 2008, 05:23:33 pm
Quote
It's like Craigslist -- hugely simple and highly useful

It's like Craigslist in that it is hugely simple and highly useful. Yeah the useful part is a little dubious but really it is like craigslist in that sense.

I don't think the wall street is journal is saying "YOU KNOW CRAIGSLIST? ITS KIND OF LIKE THAT"
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Kaworu on July 11, 2008, 05:32:46 pm
4chan is representative of the internet guys. When people think of what we do, they assume it's all lolcats and 9000.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: big ass skelly on July 11, 2008, 05:41:32 pm
4chan is representative of the internet guys. When people think of what we do, they assume it's all lolcats and 9000.
When really it's spam threads and quote chains.


They're giving usp a bad name long live CS long live cheese!!!!!
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Frankie on July 11, 2008, 06:11:45 pm
I cant imagine myself being like 10 or 13 years old and visiting sites like that. I have such a hard time grasping the fact that some kids who are less than 12 years old might have heard of TWO GIRLS ONE CUP and GOATSE and FURRIES and other weird internet shit. I don't even think I knew how SEX BASICALLY WORKED when I was at that age.

When I was 10 I...played outside...


THE INTERNET IS FFfrACkING EVIL CCORRUPTING OUR YOUTH
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Kaworu on July 11, 2008, 06:15:19 pm
When really it's spam threads and quote chains.


They're giving usp a bad name long live CS long live cheese!!!!!
dude, fucking stop it and grow up.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Vellfire on July 11, 2008, 06:17:00 pm
I cant imagine myself being like 10 or 13 years old and visiting sites like that. I have such a hard time grasping the fact that some kids who are less than 12 years old might have heard of TWO GIRLS ONE CUP and GOATSE and FURRIES and other weird internet shit. I don't even think I knew how SEX BASICALLY WORKED when I was at that age.

They really do go on 4chan though dude I taught them for two weeks and SAW IT HAPPEN, I kept forgetting they were like 12 because they were talking about 4chan all the time.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: big ass skelly on July 11, 2008, 06:46:24 pm
dude, fucking stop it and grow up.
It's not my fault you can't take jokey half fun-making of the crapshack dudette

tweakin the crap shack's nose.. GROW UP AND EAT SOME CHEEEEEEEEESE :fogetpout:
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Kaworu on July 11, 2008, 06:51:22 pm
It's not my fault you can't take jokey half fun-making of the crapshack dudette

tweakin the crap shack's nose.. GROW UP AND EAT SOME CHEEEEEEEEESE :fogetpout:
you've worn it out long ago.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: headphonics on July 11, 2008, 06:53:46 pm
well, i had a television in my room with a ton of systems hooked up to it and a computer with the internet as well when i was a kid and i still WENT OUTSIDE pretty much 95% of the time.  granted there wasn't a whole lot to do on the internet in 1996 or 97, but i think kids will probably either go out and do shit or be shut-ins regardless of whether they have a ton of stuff like laptops and xboxes.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: big ass skelly on July 11, 2008, 06:57:06 pm
you've worn it out long ago.
Not rly dude cause I still get a kick out of it~  :fogetshh:
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Kaworu on July 11, 2008, 06:58:45 pm
you're the only one. But fair enough.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: blood hell on July 11, 2008, 07:27:58 pm
For example, instead of saying "hello," the cats would say "oh hai."
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Ragnar on July 11, 2008, 07:28:28 pm
I still wish I had that crap growing up, I spent plenty of time inside that I could've spent better at least as far as indoor crap goes. But I really wish I had gotten into more of the creative stuff you can do on computers, like if I had something like Fruityloops etc. I would've freaked - oh yeah and RPG Maker would've been great when I was like... 9 and making drawings for some kind of random RPG plot but annoyed because I couldn't do anything with it. I always liked finding drawings from when I was a little kid and it would've been cool as fuck to have an RPG I made when I was at that age where you don't even remember why you drew/made it that way

looking back I remember my main taste in games was stuff like Simcity - hell, even that would've been better, to play the original Simcity for PC and crap. Even with RPGs I liked it when there was some kind of town-building sidequest

but yeah most of this stuff was more "I wish I was born later" because a lot of cool stuff on computer is fairly recent

And I think some kids will just look for gross/creepy/disgusting stuff regardless of computer, like watching bugs eat other bugs and crap - it would suck to randomly come across some porno site but when I was young I remember one or two kids who knew every swear word and all this sex stuff they shouldn't have (went to a Catholic school btw)

I mean I'm sure everybody here got some sort of weird kick out of knowing the word DAMN and stuff like that, is all
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: headphonics on July 11, 2008, 07:30:53 pm
yeah i guess!  i dunno i think we're still part of this generation and probably equally as pitiable because i feel like a lot of my free time is eaten up by the sheer usefulness of a computer with broadband too.  like if i wasn't able to do all the shit i can do with computers, i would almost definitely be forced to go out and do other stuff, so i think we're in the same boat as kids!  it's been too long to really say this accurately, but for me at least, i think it's worse now.  when i was a kid i didn't CARE about being able get a ton of movies/television/videogames/music off the internet for free.  like, it was useful, but i didn't really opt to DO THAT instead of other more social stuff.

it's all pretty tempting i guess but i feel like if you're really that tempted by THE INTERNET as a kid and wouldn't rather be outside than playing a fucking chrono trigger rom and posting on 4chan, you'd probably just be playing playstation or something if that wasn't there, not going out and riding bikes or something.  i don't think all this shit really has a particularly big impact on what kids spend their time doing.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Parker on July 11, 2008, 07:32:42 pm
I have never been to 4chan.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: crone_lover720 on July 11, 2008, 07:37:37 pm
they're gonna be so embarrassed that they posted this later
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Ragnar on July 11, 2008, 07:39:00 pm
it's all pretty tempting i guess but i feel like if you're really that tempted by THE INTERNET as a kid and wouldn't rather be outside than playing a fucking chrono trigger rom and posting on 4chan, you'd probably just be playing playstation or something if that wasn't there, not going out and riding bikes or something.  i don't think all this shit really has a particularly big impact on what kids spend their time doing.

yeah that's pretty much what I was saying

but it is still kind of sad that kids won't just have THEIR GAEMS anymore, I think there's some character-building having to choose the games you want/play the games you're stuck with and get as much fun as you can out of it

but at the same time I think I played Final Fantasy II like 11 times
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: dom on July 12, 2008, 05:44:42 pm
you're the only one. But fair enough.
no i do too sorry
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: datamanc3r on July 13, 2008, 03:48:31 am
I took the opportunity, just now, to see the site. So yeah, when the porn exploded all over the monitor and with my mom hovering behind me, just...wow. How to get out of this?
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Bled on July 13, 2008, 05:24:53 am
I hate that this shit is considered by some people to be an important part of internet culture.  If GW were a group of reasonable, intelligent people politely conversing at a dinner party, 4chan would be the blind paraplegic retard kid choking on his own tongue in the corner. 
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: xanque on July 13, 2008, 05:35:25 am
Whatever happened to bog.org?  I used to go there on occasion, and it was worse than what I remember 4chan to be like.  I haven't been to 4chan in years, but from what I remember, it was just fucking retarded. 

I think it was bog.org.  I can't even remember.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: missingno on July 13, 2008, 05:36:16 am
I hate that this shit is considered by some people to be an important part of internet culture.

but it IS an important part of internet culture. as much as we all hate it and find it annoying and stuff, it's impossibly to deny how much of an impact it has had.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Marcus on July 13, 2008, 07:07:54 am
I have never been to 4chan.

you're a better man because of it.

i attribute my lack of innocence to 4chan. 
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Vellfire on July 13, 2008, 11:59:08 am
but it IS an important part of internet culture. as much as we all hate it and find it annoying and stuff, it's impossibly to deny how much of an impact it has had.

Just like 9/11 is an important part of our history.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Marcus on July 13, 2008, 12:30:32 pm
Just like 9/11 is an important part of our history.

...are you trying to deny that 9/11 isn't??
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Vellfire on July 13, 2008, 12:36:20 pm
...are you trying to deny that 9/11 isn't??

No I am saying that just because something is IMPORTANT doesn't mean it's GOOD.

4chan IS a big part of internet culture, it's just a really SHITTY part.

I was basically agreeing with missingno.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Iaman on July 13, 2008, 02:18:39 pm
I hate that this shit is considered by some people to be an important part of internet culture.  If GW were a group of reasonable, intelligent people politely conversing at a dinner party, 4chan would be the blind paraplegic retard kid choking on his own tongue in the corner. 
Actually, it would be a group of retarded kids roughly 2000 times as large in between everybody trying to talk.  You really can't take a small portion of the internet like GW, where rules are enforced and civility encouraged, and act like it is representative of any decent portion of internet users.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: datamanc3r on July 13, 2008, 08:45:51 pm
Mmf. 'Decent' representation would not at all include 4chan in the first place. I would much prefer wasting my time here than there.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Lord Kamina on July 13, 2008, 09:52:03 pm
I hate that this shit is considered by some people to be an important part of internet culture.  If GW were a group of reasonable, intelligent people politely conversing at a dinner party, 4chan would be the blind paraplegic retard kid choking on his own tongue in the corner. 

Sometimes, the high-regard in which some of the members hold this community sickens me.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Ghost_Aspergers on July 13, 2008, 10:30:46 pm
You only say that because you've been going to 4chan for years!

[and ][/and]

Seriously though... do they not have anything better to report on? Or was this written by some jit college grad that was just hired and somehow convinced his editor that this was a good idea. 4chan is horrible and they should be ashamed for even acknowledging it's existance. I couldn't imagine anything less relevant than some shitty internet subculture that exists only in image macros and rick rolls.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Lord Kamina on July 13, 2008, 10:45:26 pm
You only say that because you've been going to 4chan for years!

[and because this and the faggy bandwagoning thing GW seems to have going is actually pretty disgusting]

Seriously though... do they not have anything better to report on? Or was this written from some jit college grad that was just hired and somehow convinced his editor this was a good idea.

I've never been a 4chan regular, though. I just go there from time to time as I find that if you don't actually frequent /b/, it's a funny and quite useful place to hang out from time to time.

What really bothers me is this whole aura of superiority in here... Like, what the fuck? It's not like GW is the prophet of internet sites... We got our own "memes"/GWisms... We got our own weird sense of humor of which I don't understand like half... Some people like Chef and DrFunk back then (I don't know now) raid other shit too... I mean... Where did this "WE ARE SO MUCH BETTER THAN EVERYONE ELSE" feeling come from? We're just another internet forum.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Bled on July 13, 2008, 10:47:07 pm
Actually, it would be a group of retarded kids roughly 2000 times as large in between everybody trying to talk.  You really can't take a small portion of the internet like GW, where rules are enforced and civility encouraged, and act like it is representative of any decent portion of internet users.

That's....not really what I was doing.  I would like to believe that there are other communities which possess a number of creative, intelligent users out there other than GW, though.  As in, other places that are essentially the antithesis of 4chan. 

Maybe it was a bad metaphor.

Quote
Sometimes, the high-regard in which some of the members hold this community sickens me.

So you're a member here but you don't hold the community in high regard?  I don't know what kind of kinky shit you're into, but I generally only make my presence known in a community that I consider to be, you know, worthwhile.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Alec on July 13, 2008, 10:59:13 pm
Here's a better example:
The INTERNET is like a party after college. There's a bunches of normal people, then the 4chan kids who nobody knows who invited them but they spend their entire time drooling on your stuff.

Then a bunch of youtube frat guys crash the party and are really loud and annoying.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Lars on July 13, 2008, 11:01:19 pm
The nachspiel with the weird exchange students is always the most fun.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: datamanc3r on July 14, 2008, 05:01:46 am
Okay so where does GW fit in?
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Warlin on July 14, 2008, 07:41:16 am
We're not 4chan.

In any case, I have absolutely no idea what 4chan is except that weird and dumb shit come out of it. 4chan definitely doesn't sound like a great culture to me at all so I don't understand why anyone would want to glorify it.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Aten on July 14, 2008, 07:53:09 am
I've never heard of 4chan before, but now I'm intrigued......

should i look for/enter that site y/n?
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: big ass skelly on July 14, 2008, 12:27:38 pm
You'd probably like it quite a lot aten.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: `~congresman Ron paul~~ on July 14, 2008, 04:15:07 pm
I've always felt that we're more of a SA community than a 4Chan one, but the line is blurred beyond distinction.

What? Pretty much everyone here hates 4chan and I'm pretty sure a lot of people hate SA too.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: dom on July 14, 2008, 05:54:05 pm
4chan is horrible and they should be ashamed for even acknowledging it's existance. I couldn't imagine anything less relevant than some shitty internet subculture that exists only in image macros and rick rolls.
hmm yes a forum out of which almost all internet memes spring from and which has caused a huge amount of drama both on the internet and in real life is irrelevant good call

a lot of the shit that came from 4chan is still better than the kind of tired "oh so witty" puns and jokes that were funny when i was 13 that come from most of gw
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Bled on July 14, 2008, 06:04:01 pm
go join fuckin' 4chan then dom get outo f my forums fucker

fuck
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: ase on July 15, 2008, 04:21:55 am
TIME Magazine has an article in this week's issue about moot, the founder of 4chan. If you ask me, it's a lot more realistic in terms of WHAT IS 4CHAN than this WSJ one.

Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: headphonics on July 15, 2008, 04:30:20 am
a lot of the shit that came from 4chan is still better than the kind of tired "oh so witty" puns and jokes that were funny when i was 13 that come from most of gw
nah youre just dumb


that is to say most of the shit on gw people think is funny isn't funny at all, but 4chan is way way worse unless you have an awful sense of humor and find shit like weeaboo and shoop da whoop funny.  please say you do dom PLEASE SAY YOU DO.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Aten on July 15, 2008, 04:33:07 am
You'd probably like it quite a lot aten.

im lik ing it already  :fogetbackflip:
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: datamanc3r on July 15, 2008, 04:41:17 am
There went mankind...
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: crone_lover720 on July 15, 2008, 05:27:44 am
I dunno what dom's talking about, I don't see horrible humor coming from many people on GW aside from a few idiots. then again I don't visit most of the forums, but I still can't imagine people here coming up with anything worse
TIME Magazine has an article in this week's issue about moot, the founder of 4chan. If you ask me, it's a lot more realistic in terms of WHAT IS 4CHAN than this WSJ one.

yeah that is much better. you can't really summarize 4chan as a POPULAR MESSAGE BOARD without emphasizing how disgusting a lot of it is.

Quote
There are few rules on 4chan. Child pornography is off limits, but not much else is.
ahaha man this is so horrible, how bad can a place be. ok guys, were gonna have to put a limit somewhere...,,PLEASE no child pornography anymore, everythign else is cool tho please don't leave we need to collect as much scum as we can get
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Mongoloid on July 15, 2008, 05:42:18 am
I didn't really think 4chan could be much different or worse than Crapshack or post9/11 until I just read that you don't need to register. Holy shit, with 8 million views a day I can only imagine what a madhouse that must be.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Vellfire on July 15, 2008, 01:16:53 pm
Quote
There are few rules on 4chan. Child pornography is off limits, but not much else is.

real or anime because if we're talking anime i feel like i've seen plenty of it on 4chan
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: ase on July 15, 2008, 01:30:06 pm
hahahaha no kidding
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: jamie on July 15, 2008, 01:32:23 pm
i've never even considered visiting 4chan, but now i've got some kind of morbid curiousity. i mean, i've heard all those little phrases and i've obviously seen the cat thing - hated every one of them, but i'd never connected them with 4chan before i thought it was just ubiquitous internet bullshit.

also - so was there a lot of child porn on this thing before and they had to put a stop to it? until now i thought it was like, a group of paedos having a pm network or something over there but apparently everything is just out in the open no registration huh?
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: ase on July 15, 2008, 01:41:46 pm
just go there man. Make sure to visit "Random" (/b/) .It's not like you are going to go INSANE like all these people are saying for dramatic effect. You are just going to be amazed at the amount of stupidity there is. It's just people posting stupid images and putting CAPTIONS on them in l33tsp33k and posting anime and porn.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: jamie on July 15, 2008, 02:05:11 pm
i'm...i'm gonna do it. i'm gonna visit www.4chan.org.

edit:

this is just a million otomons. they even say "mang".
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: missingno on July 15, 2008, 02:32:18 pm
i admit that like two years ago or something i visited /b/ for like a week or two pretty regularly. it got old very fast though and i haven't really ever felt the need to go back since.  :blarg:

also

like a year ago at work a friend of mine sent me a link to a thread on 4chan about prank calling gamestops. i normally wouldnt care but supposedly they called the gamestop where he worked at and he turned it back on then or whatever. the thread was bad but it wasn't loaded with iamges and stuff and was mostly just text so it wasn't horrible.

then my boss walked by (not a REAL boss he's just higher up but still a college student like me) and saw the screen. even though i didnt have any images or anything on he was like "heeey man 4chan at work?? that's risky" and then he made some sort of eyebrow wink at me or something.

i saw him again like a week ago and mentioned that i had gone without internet for a week or two after i got home from university and he was like "how can you SURVIVE without /b/ for so long" and then he did that weird eyebrow wink again and said "epic fail" and started chucling to himself

this guy thinks that i am a /b/tard help
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Jayce on July 15, 2008, 03:20:59 pm
i'm...i'm gonna do it. i'm gonna visit www.4chan.org.

edit:

this is just a million otomons. they even say "mang".

You summarised that so brilliantly and so quickly also haha!
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Arcan on July 17, 2008, 03:33:37 pm
I'm curious to know how almost everybody knows about 4chan. Months ago when I posted about project chanology I never even heard of 4chan and it sounded like a cool idea. Only after reading up on it and actually visiting the damn site, did I realise why people were hating on me. I guess I can kind of see how some people could be tricked into doing that stuff.

I don't think I have heard about SA though. What is it?
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: goldenratio on July 17, 2008, 03:39:43 pm
SomethingAwful.com. It's a popular humor site with a large forum.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Kaworu on July 17, 2008, 03:46:08 pm
I'm curious to know how almost everybody knows about 4chan. Months ago when I posted about project chanology I never even heard of 4chan and it sounded like a cool idea. Only after reading up on it and actually visiting the damn site, did I realise why people were hating on me. I guess I can kind of see how some people could be tricked into doing that stuff.

I don't think I have heard about SA though. What is it?
Everyone knows about 4chan because it's like the worst place on the internet. Bad things travel faster than good things.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: dom on July 17, 2008, 04:02:07 pm
nah youre just dumb


that is to say most of the shit on gw people think is funny isn't funny at all, but 4chan is way way worse unless you have an awful sense of humor and find shit like weeaboo and shoop da whoop funny.  please say you do dom PLEASE SAY YOU DO.
shopp da whoop xD
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: goldenratio on July 17, 2008, 04:38:36 pm
sage
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: NightBlade on July 18, 2008, 02:11:04 am
Thus, another pillar of civilization crumbles to dust.

I couldn't even bring myself to read the entire thing, for fear of an aneurysm.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Marcus on July 26, 2008, 09:33:35 am
Someone told me that /v/ wasn't as bad as /b/.  Kind of like saying a shoplifter isn't as bad as a mass murderer

nothing is as bad as /b/.  4chan isn't a terrible place and it's actually one of the central hubs of quick information and slashdotting because as soon as news or a link gets posted on 4chan practically the entire internet hears about it afterward.  Yeah there's a huge crowd of idiots and trolls but for the most part there are good and helpful discussions that go on.  Whenever I need something like a good anime, comic, or video game recommendation I post on /a/, /v/, and /co/ and in about 5 minutes I get 50 posts pointing me in the right direction.  About 30% of the posts is garbage and sometimes the topic will spin out of control but for the most part people TRY to be helpful before the trolls start tearing through the topic.

Now /b/ is designed primarily as a place to be a dick and even moot the creator has expressed remorse in creating it (but he knows if he deletes it then /b/tards will start fanning to other boards).  It's basically the offspring of Gamefaqs LUE but there's literally no rules at all except for "don't post illegal images" (I.E. kiddie porn but seriously everything else is a go).  I'm glad there's a depository for the worst members so they don't spill into the other boards with their nigger hate and women belong in the kitchen speeches.

Oh, and ever since last week 4chan has been down and I'm going through withdrawal I NEED MY FUCKING FIX THERE ARE ANIMES AND FANFICS I COULD BE MAKING FUN OF
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Marcus on July 26, 2008, 09:48:45 am
oh yeah if you're ever advertising anything 4chan is pretty much the best place on the internet to do it for free.  since everyone can post as anonymous, you can basically viral market to your hearts content by posting "what do you think of so and so" and since there's dozens of broad categories you can market directly to the people who will be buying your product.  in one topic we confirmed that warner bros. used the board to market the dark knight as one of their marketing guys confirmed on his blog that he constantly posted links to the various websites.
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: headphonics on July 26, 2008, 10:01:13 am
marcus if you love 4chan so much
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Marcus on July 26, 2008, 10:02:28 am
marcus if you love 4chan so much

i would but it's down right now
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: benos on August 28, 2008, 12:20:54 pm
I rather go to facepunchstudios then to SA, srs, I would not survive Something Awful. So I rather smarten up.

Facepunch Studios always breaks rule 1 and 2. :p
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Vellfire on August 28, 2008, 01:06:52 pm
great bump
Title: 4chan on WSJ
Post by: Ryan on August 28, 2008, 05:12:24 pm
don't bump month old topics unless you really have something new to add!

if anyone has anything new to add to this pm me and i'll unlock the topic but otherwise...