Re:What 4chan thinks of HN
by SwellJoe on Sunday November 17, 2013 @06:43AM
(#6748516)
"since when?"
You've been to 4chan before, right? I just took at look. I could point to a half dozen deeply disturbing threads happening as we speak. They are conversations being held predominantly by young white males about even younger girls, some of whom have had their real identity revealed by the creepy stalking that 4chan is so well known for.
"Most people who get ousted are narcissistic 16 year old's."
So, all 16 year olds, then. Every teenager is self-involved. Their brain isn't finished yet. That's no excuse for a bunch of grown men to wage war on them.
"Adria and Anita being two fantastic examples of such."
So, you believe what happened in those cases was a sane, rational, and fair response to someone saying something that 4channers disagreed with? You call them "narcissists", one because she wanted to make some videos about sexism in video games and she asked some people to voluntarily give her a few bucks to do it, and the other because she thought it was inappropriate to make stupid dick jokes at a conference attended by women and young girls.
See, here's the thing...you could convince me that Adria Richards could have handled that situation with more subtlety. But, the response of 4chan? You believe that was justified? I honestly have a hard time wrapping my head around that kind of mindset.
And, Anita literally did nothing to anyone. She wanted to make some videos. Don't like the concept of videos about sexism in video games? Don't contribute, don't watch them. That's what I did, and the videos never bothered me one bit because I never saw them (didn't need to, as I already knew video games were sexist as hell). Huh. How hard was that? In what world is it OK to wage war on someone for expressing their opinion? In that world, anonymous forums become the only place one can express an opinion without fear, because their are vigilante gangs standing at the ready to try to destroy you at the first sign that they might disagree with you.
That it's considered justified by so many within that community because of, I guess, how strongly someone disagrees with the opinions being stated, is disturbing.
If 4chan only went after people with power, I would cheer them on. Politicians? Hell, yeah, go for it. Tom Cruise? Fuck, yeah. Bankers? Why not? Abusive cops? I'm OK with that too. But, they often don't. They go after easy targets; they're often bullies (while absurdly wearing the badge of "standing up for the little guy"). One of the easiest targets is young girls, and 4channers go after young girls daily.
You've been to 4chan before, right? I just took at look. I could point to a half dozen deeply disturbing threads happening as we speak. They are conversations being held predominantly by young white males about even younger girls, some of whom have had their real identity revealed by the creepy stalking that 4chan is so well known for.
"Most people who get ousted are narcissistic 16 year old's."
So, all 16 year olds, then. Every teenager is self-involved. Their brain isn't finished yet. That's no excuse for a bunch of grown men to wage war on them.
"Adria and Anita being two fantastic examples of such."
So, you believe what happened in those cases was a sane, rational, and fair response to someone saying something that 4channers disagreed with? You call them "narcissists", one because she wanted to make some videos about sexism in video games and she asked some people to voluntarily give her a few bucks to do it, and the other because she thought it was inappropriate to make stupid dick jokes at a conference attended by women and young girls.
See, here's the thing...you could convince me that Adria Richards could have handled that situation with more subtlety. But, the response of 4chan? You believe that was justified? I honestly have a hard time wrapping my head around that kind of mindset.
And, Anita literally did nothing to anyone. She wanted to make some videos. Don't like the concept of videos about sexism in video games? Don't contribute, don't watch them. That's what I did, and the videos never bothered me one bit because I never saw them (didn't need to, as I already knew video games were sexist as hell). Huh. How hard was that? In what world is it OK to wage war on someone for expressing their opinion? In that world, anonymous forums become the only place one can express an opinion without fear, because their are vigilante gangs standing at the ready to try to destroy you at the first sign that they might disagree with you.
That it's considered justified by so many within that community because of, I guess, how strongly someone disagrees with the opinions being stated, is disturbing.
If 4chan only went after people with power, I would cheer them on. Politicians? Hell, yeah, go for it. Tom Cruise? Fuck, yeah. Bankers? Why not? Abusive cops? I'm OK with that too. But, they often don't. They go after easy targets; they're often bullies (while absurdly wearing the badge of "standing up for the little guy"). One of the easiest targets is young girls, and 4channers go after young girls daily.