Articles & Happening Meta Discussion

Articles & Happenings is the third attempt at a news board on the Kiwi Farms. It is a cursed place. Every moderator who has been assigned here has resigned within a year. During 2016, the political crossfire was so bad it spread to different boards and culminated in me banning American news discussion entirely for several months. It has been deleted in its entirety twice. There is no actual discussion here, it's people posting garbage. It leans much further right than the rest of the site and doesn't particularly conduct discussion because dissenting opinions are dogpiled by a thousand memelords posting shit they read on /pol/ without any critical analysis.

The only rules that can be enforced are empirical ones with boolean violation answers. New threads must cite a real source directly and must use the headline of the article as a thread title without any editorializing. Articles must be archived in some way and must link to the original article. Replies that are one word or a reaction images are automatic one-month bans from the board.

I'm creating this now because it seems like this place is here to stay and is one of the largest areas of the entire site. I might as well throw in bare minimum effort to improve it. I don't even try to find mods for here because they will quit, without exception. I've added new prefixes ("Business" and "Crime") just now.

Discuss.


New threads should be made like this.

 

[Superman93]

Seems like the best remedy is to call them faggots for getting mad about the bad internet points

I do that all the time. Hell I'm doing it right now

 

[X Prime]

Does me wailing impotently about the fact that people care about negrates, count as me caring about negrates?

It's a real existential conundrum.

 

[RichardMongler]

You're the quintessential "enlightened political poster" everyone hates.

Speak for yourself, buddy. It's YOU who's forcing the issue with me. Most others could take or leave me. Speaking of A&N posts, you have made almost as many thread in A&N as I have with me beating you by exactly ONE thread. Not that big a difference. My range of topics maybe heavily focused on politics (you may not be interested in politics, but politics are interested in you), but I'd like to think I'm capable of discussing culture, especially music.

It's also not like I don't use this site for what it's intended for. I did discover this precious lunatic, albeit he's gone AWOL:

https://embed.kiwifarms.st/threads/...vid-the-stoned-apes-psychedelics-daily.37012/

 

[Nobunaga]

Who's bitching about neg rates? I keep hearing that from this thread but I never see any examples.

Just for you baby i went back to the first 20 pages
Granted, the first 5 posts are about dogpiling and The last stand has gotten better, but there were some sticker complains
Shit doesnt hit the fan until Cosmos opens his dumb mouth and Senior "if her age is on the clock shes ready for the cock" Lex starts sperging out

Spoiler: Warning, autism

What and how would you define as left-wing vs. right wing in A&H standards? Is just criticizing Trump enough to be considered left-wing or "libtard"? I have heard that A&H is considered /pol/ lite by some users, but even the admin of Kiwi Farms thinks that AND makes an official post addressing it, there's a deep rooted problem with this section.

Removing ratings won't help matters; I think it'll worsen the problem. It would encourage more shitposting and one liners from its toxic community. Informative, for instance helps as you get feedback if your post has secondary information on what you're talking about. @Cosmos helps mix up A&H with environmental news articles, but not many people frequent them or try to be edgy.

The ratings also help with who likes what you have to say, even if they may disagree. Another inconsistency I've noticed with A&H is its stance on Muslims or Jews depending on the context of the article. It's a 40/60 split on which religious group is despised the most and here comes the rabbi and "religion of peace" jokes. You should be allowed to critique anybody regardless of religion, but when the word Muslim or Jew pops up, everybody loses their shit. There's little intelligent discussion with those subsets.

I feel the OP basically laid out all the reasons this sub should be closed. It is essentially a right-wing version of ResetEra, where any attempt at making quality discussion and adding nuanced opinions is seen as you pissing in people's cornflakes.

The ratings system only makes the problem worse because it dissuades people from breaking out of the "norm" and creates an even more autistic circlejerk than people here complain about. IMO, if there is a 1st solution to be attempted, it should be disabling the ratings system on this sub.

Also this.

Imagine caring about fucking imaginary stickers on a forum that was made with the purpouse to mock an autistic idiot and his oc donut steal comic
God, you idiots are so pathetic no wonder you cant take the heat when someone mocks you

Are you MOCKING me????

BWAHAHA!

I'll Holy Grail your silly ass!

When people do try to defend their position they get drowned out and dog piled by you inbreds and who the hell wants to deal with that? Nobody even bothers anymore.

I know I’ll never be popular here and I don’t really care how the regs here see me. But if someone here wants to discuss something with me and I might get something of substance out of it, why not reply, right?

But if jokingly calling them inbreds was enough to get them going...

Yes, plz no bully.

My actual suggestions for improving A&H:

1. Disable all ratings. It will cut down on a lot of clutter where people always try to be the first person to make the same tired jokes, discourage dog-piling, and overall I think will foster better discussion.
2. Ban posting op-eds outside of the clickbait thread.
3. Ban users who post duplicate threads.
4. Ban users who post reaction images.
5. Make more megathreads.
6. Limit users to only posting a maximum of 2 threads a day.

Potentially. I do think a lot of the joke repetition is definitely ratings farming. It could also help to be a bit more vigilant and leave reminders on posters/possible temp threadbans for people who just repeat the same memes constantly. Also add "If someone has already made the exact same post, you don't need to re-word it." to the No 1 word posts guideline. It's basically the exact same kind of problem: filler posting.

eta: the guideline explicitly says: If anyone could write your post, it doesn't need to be made.
And I believe that applies to a lot of interchangeable shallow "lol nigs"/dems bad/enviroment gay posting.

Reaction images are a cancerous waste and becoming a more common occurrence. Its better to stamp out the habit. Megathreads are good for when a topic starts generating more individual threads. It actually also helps discussion for some things, because you can add information to a megathread that wouldn't be worth an individual thread on its own. Having megathreads for more hot button issues also tends to cut back on garbage posting, because a lot of the attention whores lose interest.

If you don't care about stickers, you won't care if they're gone either.

The enraged summer children that think revenge negrating actually means something do. Kinda hilarious to log in to dozens of negrates on ancient posts because you gave some sped an autistic rating.

I am a woman. Not sure where the male pronouns came from, haha.

And I think it’s pretty obvious that A&H has been inundated with /pol/tards, many of whom joined after the Christchurch massacre. I just remember waves of brand-new accounts glorifying the slaughter of random Muslims. Also, I’ve been called a bleeding heart libtard and a brainwashed socialist for what I think are pretty benign opinions that wouldn’t raise eyebrows elsewhere.

And lol, people who say there isn’t an echo chamber problem are usually firmly in the echo chamber themselves. Most people with leftist opinions have been run off or just don’t want to deal with the constant neg ratings anymore.

The problem isn't "lefties are outnumbered", it's "reasonable political opinions on either side of the aisle are outnumbered by autistic /pol/tards who shriek and throw their own feces when confronted with opinions such as 'I do not believe that genocide is good', 'I believe black people deserve the same rights as white people', or 'I think that there are ways besides violent revolution to deal with our current political issues'."

I've been negrated twice now in this thread, now I'm getting dogpiled. Where are all the pol kiddies to negrate my detractors away and dogpile them?
I have never been to pol and saying black people aren't more likely to steal is hardly a pol talking point.

Maybe you guys just immediately dismiss anything that doesn't agree with you 100 percent. As you just lumped me in with pol due to ????.

Regarding a six-year old being arrested for having a fit, seventh post:


In a thread about the SAS neutralizing an ISIS terrorist op, third post:


And, in fulfillment of the Rule of Three, JohnDoe's big-brain take on a rape victim going public about her experience:




If you consistently "joke" about holding radical political opinions, defend those position when people disagree, and only say you were joking when called out, others are going to doubt the sincerity of your jokes.

Among the general population of Farms posters; if you look at the ratio, you'll see there's a fair number of people who are upvoting them, which suggests that the issue is a bit more than just one or two people. I'd say there's a distinct cadre of posters that objectively shit up A&H (which others here are calling the 9-5 posters). I will fully yield, however, that this cadre probably isn't the majority: that was a case of me making a hasty generalization, and I apologize.

If you seriously consider and im gonna say it again FUCKING IMAGINARY POINTS important you are better off in shitholes like plebbit or killing yourself because its pathetic

I am willing to bet those comments were downvoted or ignored though. And some of this is just "i don't like their opinions."

But I'm part of the problem so I guess I am not fit to discuss it. I'm sure if you kick everyone out of this conversation eventually it'll agree with you. Apparently I'm a schoolyard bully now somehow...

You really don't get to both play Mr. Jaded Internet Pro Guy and make "oh, woe-is-me, I am just a humble meme farmer being bullied by these users" posts.

Look at those post ratings again. At this writing, they're ambivalent at best.

Wait, this shit is about post ratings?

We have truly become reddit 2.0, from catty posters, to muh upvotes, to wanting to ban everything that makes me mad, now we only need the last few good jannys to start banning people due to the fact that mods are already faggots

Jesus fuck, this thread is almost brand new and it already has bullshit going on. I thought this was supposed to be discussion of shit happening in the outer world?

Why are we discussing negative ratings? Everyone gets negative ratings, I sure do. You do. The guy who said he likes the idea of fucking dogs did. Who cares? It just means you said something people didn't like, whoop de fucking do.

Not really. Nothing on this board has any real world effect, really. As they say, "nothing of value has been lost." That goes for my posts the same as anyone's. If you get butthurt over pixels you have issues to work out.

"Butt hurt over pixels." Why are we even having this thread then? It seems like a lot of people are "getting butthurt over pixels," or we wouldn't even be having this conversation, and A&H would be left just the way it is.

 

[The Last Stand]

If we continue to bitch about ratings, they may just disappear.

 

[The Cunting Death]

View attachment 1421083


View attachment 1421090

View attachment 1421092

View attachment 1421095

View attachment 1421096
View attachment 1421097

View attachment 1421098
View attachment 1421099

View attachment 1421100

A bonus second one from the same person:
View attachment 1421101

@heathercho
@Flynt's Missing Pecker
@RichardMongler
@Florence
@Senor Cardgage Mortgage
@St8Bustah
@Orange Rhymer
@dinoman

You faggots got anything to say for yourselves? Btw most of these tards are A&H regulars with exception of St8bustah who is just a dumb newfag.

Calm down you silly cunt

I have no idea why you're so upset

 

[RichardMongler]

Calm down you silly cunt

I have no idea why you're so upset

I suppose he's mad that people are breaking up his circlejerk. Then again, I'm not terribly familiar with this user who just wanted to start shit with me and others over minor expressed annoyances with spite ratings.

There's a difference between negative rating and spite rating, folks. When you're just adding negative stickers to otherwise reasonable posts, then it comes across as spiteful. Yes, ratings ultimately do not matter, but for fuck's sake, don't cheapen them.

 

[ConfederateIrishman]

If we continue to bitch about ratings, they may just disappear.

I unironicly think they should tbh; Ratings make the website more like reddit.

 

[Cryogonal]

I unironicly think they should tbh; Ratings make the website more like reddit.

One could argue that no ratings makes the website more like Something Awful. Endless emptyquoting, "I agree/disagree" responses, that kind of clutter.

 

[beautiful person]

There's a difference between negative rating and spite rating, folks. When you're just adding negative stickers to otherwise reasonable posts, then it comes across as spiteful. Yes, ratings ultimately do not m

Explain the difference to me. What makes a reasonable post versus an unreasonable post? What makes it spite versus a strongly opposing viewpoint?

 

[Florence]

One could argue that no ratings makes the website more like Something Awful. Endless emptyquoting, "I agree/disagree" responses, that kind of clutter.

I agree.

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

Explain the difference to me. What makes a reasonable post versus an unreasonable post? What makes it spite versus a strongly opposing viewpoint?

Reasonable post = endorses his worldview.
Unreasonable post = disagrees with his worldview.
Spite = callng his worldview retarded.
Strongly opposing viewpoint = Basically saying that he's right and just, but not wholesale endorsing him.
He's characterized telling people to kill themselves via medical overdose a "reasonable post" and saying that the Holocaust happened as an "unreasonable post" in the past.

 

[and 3 others]

I unironicly think they should tbh; Ratings make the website more like reddit.

The critical difference is that the ratings here don't make posts more or less visible (unless you count the highlight feature, which is fortunately pretty useless outside of happening megathreads).

 

[snailslime]

Sure, I’ll bite. I don’t think @snailslime has ever actually rated me MOTI, but when you see someone chimping out over opinions they disagree with it’s always funny to watch them try and justify it.

Also, like 75% of your recent posts are in A&H. Pot, kettle, black.

Just for you baby i went back to the first 20 pages
Granted, the first 5 posts are about dogpiling and The last stand has gotten better, but there were some sticker complains
Shit doesnt hit the fan until Cosmos opens his dumb mouth and Senior "if her age is on the clock shes ready for the cock" Lex starts sperging out

I suppose he's mad that people are breaking up his circlejerk. Then again, I'm not terribly familiar with this user who just wanted to start shit with me and others over minor expressed annoyances with spite ratings.

There's a difference between negative rating and spite rating, folks. When you're just adding negative stickers to otherwise reasonable posts, then it comes across as spiteful. Yes, ratings ultimately do not matter, but for fuck's sake, don't cheapen them.

you take this site too seriously.

 

[RichardMongler]

Explain the difference to me. What makes a reasonable post versus an unreasonable post? What makes it spite versus a strongly opposing viewpoint?

If there is an effort towards making a post where a user lays out sound reasoning and makes a compelling argument, then I would consider that a reasonable post. I can understand neg-rating that's needlessly smug, glib, self-congratulatory or shortsighted, but when someone assigns a negative rating to a post that otherwise really doesn't deserve it, what am I to make of that user's intentions?

Telling people to kill themselves via medical overdose a "reasonable post"

Are you referring to this post? Yeah, it was cunty and flippant, but I never told you to kill yourself. In fact, I was initially sympathetic, but you keep eroding any good will by just being an insufferable douche, so I chose to mock you for being dependent on drugs to make it through the day. If you actually depend on them, then, you do you. One of the nice things about being prejudiced against self-admittedly crazy people is I don't have to take anything you say seriously and be infinitely thankful I don't need them.

Holocaust happened as an "unreasonable post" in the past

I never once implied that stating the Holocaust happened was unreasonable. You are being dishonest, as usual. If anything, my thread was affirming it and placing the burden of proof on deniers to come up with reasons for their beliefs which are almost unequivocally stated to be delusional. I endorsed @Occam's Spork because he seemed to have a very nuanced take when the thread was clearly devolving into a shouting match between deniers and affirmers. If you think this means I consider those who affirm the timeline of events as unreasonable, then I don't know what else to tell you.

you take this site too seriously.

Touché.

 

[Superman93]

If there is an effort towards making a post where a user lays out sound reasoning and makes a compelling argument, then I would consider that a reasonable post. I can understand neg-rating that's needlessly smug, glib, self-congratulatory or shortsighted, but when someone assigns a negative rating to a post that otherwise really doesn't deserve it, what am I to make of that user's intentions?

you sound like a reddit faggot lmao. i want you to read that out loud then realize how absurdly you take this site this seriously

@Occam's Spork because he seemed to have a very nuanced take when the thread was clearly devolving into a shouting match between deniers and affirmers. If you think this means I consider those who affirm the timeline of events as unreasonable, then I don't know what else to tell you.

"Very nuance, Very highly intelligent, Super articulate and well-thought out take, so incredibly smwart!" *huffs fart*

 

[Iwasamwillbe]

God why is this about stickers again?

If someone constantly gives you bad stickers, and they never actually contribute to any discussion you were in at large, then you should just recognize them as either a low-effort baiter, or a faggot assmad about differing opinions yet too unwilling/unable to actually argue his own views, and you should ignore them.

 

[It's HK-47]

See? Everyone's generating bad stickers and it's very entertaining. The system works.

 

[Scratch This Nut]

See? Everyone's generating bad stickers and it's very entertaining. The system works.

why does it even matter? No one can see how many negrates you even have anymore.

 

[byuu]

Yes, ratings ultimately do not matter, but for fuck's sake, don't cheapen them.

Sticker inflation is a serious issue.