Moot lists some examples in this video:

https://youtu.be/a_1UEAGCo30?si=JMVO5ox3K2AhxrMY&t=97

Wiktionary has a surprisingly robust list

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:English_4chan_slang

Note, some of these are associated with the far right.

> fren later came to prominence on sites such as 4chan and the subreddit /r/frenworld as a dog whistle used by far-right white nationalists and fascists to refer to each other

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/fren

Why does that matter?

So you can have a clue who you're talking to.

because if you're trying to say a site was a positive influence, because it created a number of Nazi slurs and dog whistles... complete the sentence yourself

>Note, some of these are associated with the far right.

I think that should be trivially obvious based on the discussion at hand. What is interesting, though, is how so many of these terms came into public use as well-known, generic terms, despite the far right being poison to any normal person's reputation. Even many of the ones containing obviously offensive components have made it into wider use in some clipped form. Eg:

- based

- goyslop -> slop

- normalfag -> normie

I could be wrong but I don't think 'normie' came from 'normalfag'. I'm somewhat skeptical that 'goyslop' was the first use of 'slop' in this way too. And of course 'based' comes from rapper Lil B.

I think "normalfag" is a backformation from "normie"; at any rate, "normie" is itself 4chan slang that entered norm... ie... usage one way or another. "Based" was coined by Lil B but absolutely entered wide usage via being adopted as a meme by 4chan.

“Normie” is indeed used on 4chan but it didn’t originate there. Yes I agree that “based” was popularized by 4chan. Not so sure that “normie” was.

Should be noted that they have a history of trying to co-opt neutral terms and symbols. Like the frog and the ok gesture.

Pepe the frog became associated with the online far right because it was a commonly used memetic avatar in general 4chan culture, and became intertwined with the space's shift to the political right in a fairly organic way. The association was boosted by (IIRC) the 2016 Clinton campaign's assertion that it was a far-right symbol, which was obviously embraced by those people as a sort of irreverent statement. Likewise, there may have been some very thin, actually existing connection between the far right and the "ok" gesture, but it really came about as an association that was imposed by the media and subsequently embraced by that community. To say these terms were "co-opted" isn't really correct.

I think there's actually a better case to be made that the pipeline of "co-option" (if you want to call it that) is stronger in the reverse direction. I posted a sister comment to yours about that.

>actually existing connection between the far right and the "ok" gesture but it really came about as an association that was imposed by the media and subsequently embraced by that community

There wasn't any connection. You are running things in reverse. There was an explicit concerted effort to 'take it over'. With celebrations when it succeeded as the media to the bait.

The opposite is true! It was falsely associated with the right by the clueless left-wing media (the same people that were doing interviews with "the hacker named 4chan"), which was then embraced tongue-in-cheek because it was so ridiculous.

You both are wrong, thee is actually a symbiosis. Media (any kind) need freaks, maniacs, disasters to generate views, and keep common people puzzled, thrilled, and entertained. Anons need lulz. Therefore complete nonsense — “white poodle is a secret way to say Heil Hitler to the ones in the know” — will be reported in hopes that it won't fizzle out, but will become the next media sensation, and immediately there will be threads from totally legit specialists discussing how to breed the whitest dog possible.

You are describing exactly what I said: the media makes up nonsense--or is fed it by activists--and then people think it is funny and play with the idea.