> With the AGPL license being legal kryptonite I wonder if license compatibility drove the decision

Unlikely. There's a number of other strong indications that basic maintenance was being neglected, including shell transcripts showing that at least one server was running FreeBSD 10.1 (released in 2014, end-of-life in 2018), and PHP code using the mysql extension (which was deprecated in PHP 5.6 = 2014 and removed in PHP 7.0 = 2015).

It's probably not a coincidence that 4chan was sold to a new owner in 2015.

Not a lot of reputable advertisers want to associate themselves with 4chan I imagine.

uninformed or malicious FUD.

agpl is no different than gpl if you're distributing applications. if you host the functionality of the application with improvements then it's rightly so cryptonite and you deserve it.

Sad to see less and less AGPL code out there. It's truly one if the best licenses to prevent the SV MO of taking shit they didn't make and selling it as if they did.

I just relicensed a bunch of old code to AGPL, probably with little practical effect since it's old code: https://www.immibis.com/blog/relicensing

4chan aren’t modifying the Ghostscript code, why would they care about the license?