Thread 24665376

Serious question; why is this board so bad?
/lit/ only reads and talks about the same books over and over again. Not to mention the amount of extremely low quality posts.
We're wasting the free speech 4chan gave us on silly, unfunny and repetitive posts instead of using this board to its full potential.
This is a literature board. For Christ's sake!

new readers come in > they read what's on the meme chart > they branch out > they find no use in staying on a board that only talks about meme books > they leave > new readers come in > they read what's on the meme chart...

Serious question: why is this board so bad?
/lit/ only offers the same tired criticisms about same things over and over again.

>>24665376 (OP)
ive noticed this as well and its happening on /fit/ and /g/ as well
its a different kind of low quality post than this site used to see and it seems to be consistent. im betting that its organised by someone/thing
i only use /lit/ now because its easy to filter midwits lol

>>24665385
I think most boards on the site are stale and too repetitive and off-topic now.

>>24665376 (OP)
Because half the threads its always about 'muh women' and every retard flocks to the board because of it. This isnt the biggest problem or only problem but it is symptomatic.

Fear not anon. I am on a campaign of Artposting that shall rearrange the world in my own image. Like Alexander, there will be linguistic statues of my mind erected still standing tall in posts 50 years from now. Join me, brother. You could be my Hephaestion. The first technique is the alchemical transformation of a bad thread into a good one through sheer power and grace. Nothing is beyond redemption. Not even your childish, bemoaning, useless, lifeless voice.

Enough with all the ballyhoo and just start.

>>24665387
Does 4chan have any good quality boards? I'm thinking /a/, but I'm not interesed in children's cartoons anymore. /ck/ is probably good too. I just glace at it from time to time.

>>24665388
So, the same tired criticism which has been getting tossed about for a decade now. And 4chan does not learn, they just keep trying the same things over and over and over just in case this time it will provide a different result.

>>24665403
honestly there hasnt been a good quality board for nearly a decade now
the sad thing is that there also hasnt been a good quality public website (that i know of, obviously) for about the same amount of time
the open internet died and its corpse is rotting

>>24665376 (OP)
>how
report crappy threads
jannies dont do anything until multiple reports
stop whining
start whacking
>also
I just went thru the catalog and it seems interesting especially compared to the drivel in /pol/
>and
see this thread too
>>24655125

>>24665376 (OP)

There is a huge difference between somebody who reads literature vs somebody who writes literature.
I would say 99% of people here just consume without creating anything, therefore don't expect even one single creative thought or post.
A board of only writers on the other hand, I would expect to have much higher quality of posts as it would just be inhabited by creative types.

Its normal for 4chan though, nobody on /mu writes music, they just shit talk about it, nobody on /p takes good photos, they just shit talk about camera brands and nobody on /lit writes books they just shit talk about the same few meme books.
Its why I often check out /x. If you are a writer I recon its by far the most creative board with the most creative writing.

>>24665376 (OP)
make a greco-roman literature board

>>24665376 (OP)
>why is /lit/ so bad?
one single simple rule should be implemented: >OP must post, show, or name at least ONE particular book to start off a thread
And if there is a thread opener without the mention of a book, without a picture of a book, or without a page from nor a trace of a book, then this thread should be ignored, reported, deleted, banned, and damned to nothingness. end of story. no more whores, no more bullshit, no more frogposters. you can still make threads about ideas or generals, but there needs to be some sort of literature at the base of the discussion.

>>24665764
In theory I agree, and I long for a creative writing board filled with inside jokes, characters and replications, fiction presented as non-fiction, non-fiction presented as fiction, writing exercises, compliments and critique, inspirations and motivations, etc. But one need only peek inside the so-claimed writer's general to see the sad reality. I hope more anons begin to practise their creativity and expression without the post-form itself. It is the modern medium, after all. And anonymity removes all limitations.

>>24665376 (OP)
ban shitposting because this board needs to slow down.

>>24665790
Double the amount of pages
These are not image-heavy.

>>24665376 (OP)
What made /lit/ (and 4chan and the internet) good was that no one tried to make it anything, they just let it happen. These days the internet is split between content creators and consumers with most people being the consumers and treating the internet as a complaints department. What made the internet good was that most everyone was a content creator, everyone contributed and they weren't using every post they made to shill themselves to the mindless consumer masses.

The internet probably will never be good again, best we can hope for is carving out a few small niches which suck a tolerable amount for a brief period before people start complaining how it is not the same as it was when they discovered it. I highly doubt 4chan will ever be good again.

>>24665776
This rule fails to address the dozens of shitposts begun by naming books. Crime and Punishment is under the heel of this genre of shitpostin while infinite jest and blood meridian watch on in chains.

Religion is split between /his/ and /lit/
/his/ now has a bunch of low quality threads that aren't even /his/ regularly
/lit/ does work somewhat not for pointless bickering about faith but as a medium to discuss the literary aspects of the various traditions of the world
Philosophy came from Greece, but Hebrew and Indian ("Buddhist") philosophy is also valid to discuss.

ban
>tell me what I thought of [x]
>now that the dust has settled, [*insert question here*]
>apologise (*insert picture of author here*)
you know what would improve this board? you know what is at the root of all this shitposting? irony. let’s cultivate some sincerity and reap its benefits.

>>24665793
any shitty thread about books like C&P, IJ, BM are LEAGUES above the average shipost thread on /lit/

>>24665794
It’s time for a /rel/
/his/ doesn’t want it
/lit/ kicks the ball down the hall to /his/
and /x/ is god-awful because every discussion there’s begins by throwing out every shred of coherence in exchange for >it came to me in a dream< levels of assertions (which have their place; but they ruin religious discussion)

>>24665804
please elaborate, it will only further the point

>>24665812
just have a look at the catalogue and compare threads featuring a book and threads without even the mention of a book. we could erase the latter category without losing anything of value.

>>24665810
Philosophy would then be split between spiritual and materialist boards.

>>24665403
>/a/
>good

>>24665828
>porn, moe, shonen threads
>not good

TO SAVE LIT WE MUST CRUCIFY THE MISSIONARIES, INJECT THE PEDANTS WITH OXYTOCIN AND SCOPOLAMINE, AND CASTRATE THE SEXBAITERS.

>>24665793
see
>>24660872

unironically i think every board needs to have the gimmick that r9k has, that every post must be exactly unique

sadly this board is more about memes and lit meta rather than actually discussing lit

>>24665887
Shitposting will always exist, and it has a worthy place, but since this is Lit, and since words are our medium, I have far, far higher expectations for the quality of even the dumbest post. Unfortunately this is rarely the case.

>>24665388
I don't think there's a way to improve /lit/, and I don't have the time or will to make an effort to actively improve this place. But during the first two years I was here this place has given me a lot, so I will propose my solutions, which I have repeated over and over in similar threads:
>1. write effortposts about stuff you like
>2. ignore threads and posts about stuff you don't like
It's the only way. My directions for point 1 are very simple:
>effortposts should be directed at discussing specific content: it is better to post a paragraph of a book or even a picture of a few pages as a point of discussion - this way you encourage people to read at least bits of the book
>avoid generalposting. This means not posting and not answering to: generalized theories about stuff, threads about god or poorly understood philosophical points with no reference to texts, historical generalizations etc.
My improvement proposal revolves around following the basic guideline for the board: "/lit/ is for the discussion of books". Just talk about texts - and if you can, not only about the book in general, but about specific pages, specific passages and specific points. This way people who aren't interested in reading likely won't join the conversation, or won't damage it with shitposting once you get 2/3 users engaged in an anctual discussion about something specific.

>>24665804
Lurk moar

>>24665764
>and nobody on /lit writes books they just shit talk about the same few meme books.
shocking to the anons in the writing contests here.

>>24665376 (OP)
>For Christ's sake!
Allegiance spotted.

>>24665376 (OP)
Basically, the humble, high effort posters have been stalked and chased out by arrogant, combative midwits who insist on making every debate on an anonymous forum personal. Even the previously high barrier to entry threads are being infiltrated.

The guy who calls everybody Theodorus is great example in recent times. He's literally too stupid to distinguish between a stuffy, pedantic Straussian and an illiterate Romanian homosexual. He's that clueless of a reader. Yet, he knows enough of the basic terms to make himself a nuisance and ruin conversations in otherwise highly specialized threads.

And regarding the high effort posters who haven't left yet? They're generally too defensive to have productive conversations with on key topics. I don't blame them given how retarded the internet has become. But these people are usually afflicted with superiority complexes too so they contribute to the problem.

I still check in every now and then. But there's hardly anything more to be gained here. If conversations don't move forward, then there is nothing novel to learn. Maybe Ristanon might stay for more than just a quick knowledge bomb drive by. But other than that, I'm not holding my breath.

>>24665376 (OP)
Maybe you should make a topic of such vaunted quality instead of whining about the others.

>>24666185
Don't know, this is easily more valuable than most threads on the board, and if the people don't collectively see the problem, they'll just keep spamming high-effort threads to uselessness.

Make a philosophy and religion board. Let /lit/ be /lit/ and force the 18-year-old future college dropouts to do their mating dances, argue like pseuds, and flap their asses somewhere else. Most bad faith posters that derail threads are the same teenagers arguing about Greek philosophy that they cannot grasp. /lit/ should primarily be about the appreciation, discussion, and creation of literature. While philosophical and religious texts are extremely significant, the people that come here for them are not interested in 80% of thread topics and lack the self control to mind their own business.

You can really tell who is butthurt about not being praised like some sort of messiah for their midwittery.

>>24665376 (OP)
Board population is way down, I'd guess. Population is down on 4chan in general, and a little moreso after the hack. Population is low enough that you can figure out who's who as regulars in threads, which is grating if it turns out those people just fight all the time. No fresh blood, and the only sorta fresh blood is from zoomers who only know 4chan as the place where you're expected to troll and shitpost.

>>24665376 (OP)
What would be a good quality post for you?

>>24666256
The people smugly making posts like this are usually the most guilty of this because they project onto everybody else. Nobody who actually cares about these topics cares about being affirmed or denied. That's why we're here on an anonymous forum and not grifting on Twitter or YouTube or whatever.

I just want to exchange insights and learn from people who also have been studying these books. People who needlessly get in the way are the problem. And unfortunately, there's been a lot more "getting in the way" than any sort of exchange of insight. It's just my way or the highway and personal vendettas. That kills discussion.

>>24666252
Agreed bra. I'm so sick of those semantical perverts attempting to quantify the unquantifiable by raping language. We must build a wall.

>>24666303
Good posts must either be insightful, elucidating, original, or entertaining. Excellent posts combine several of these aspects together. Artposts combine all three into a unified, devasting form. These are very rare.

>>24666252
/lit/ has been discussing philosophy since its inception, and high quality threads that reference the texts are on topic as per board rules since time immemorial. Besides, there is almost no overlap between the Pynchon threads (if there are any these days, seems like that era of lit is dead regrettably), and the philosophy threads. And even with a certain topic, there's a huge range in the quality of discussion, e.g. passage-centric discussion of Greek philosophy vs. some random bait Nietzsche thread where nobody has actually read Nietzsche.

/lit/ is a slow enough board so that there is space on
/lit/ for every topic done well. You're not going to resuscitate literature by blanket killing off the philosophy. You're just going to have dead literature and no philosophy.

These posts come off as spiteful, to say the least.

>>24665376 (OP)
It's just not worth it to effort-post. Every (You) is worth about as much, and most of them are in the hands of retards in this economy, and retards don't pay attention to effort.

>>24666309
I'm sorry, I don't find indulging on personal "intellectual gratification" as being 'learned'. Personally, I'll engauge with idea's separate from the person.

The only people going," You must politely let me express my expression." are those that want their discussions to fit into a pea sized box.
>I just want to exchange insights and learn from people who also have been studying these books
and yet you are the arbiter of the quality?
>People who needlessly get in the way are the problem.
It sounds like you get in your own way. It is the definition of a 'you problem', to come to a topic and expecting it to go a certain way, to your taste, like you need to suckle some sort of psued-acting class guised as a discussion.

You're looking for a screen play with a casting couch and everything. You can't even pick whether you want to be a director or the prop tree in the background.

>>24666309
When I make an effortpost I enjoy the retards who get in the way because they keep the thread active until somebody with specialized knowledge on the topic comes along.

>>24666338
I think you're way too obsessed with this idea of being seen and recognized. I just like to see discussions move and more comprehensive understandings reached. I've had my mind changed on many topics before. That's my taste, I guess? That I like getting a deeper understanding of things? Fine. Guilty as charged.

You're overplaying your hand and showing your insecurities by the way. There's no reason to come on 4chan for intellectual gratification. In fact, I think you're probably part of the problem that I mentioned originally. Take a step back and realize you don't have all the answers. None of us do.

>>24665376 (OP)
>Serious question; why is this board so bad?
You should have used a colon here, not a semi-colon. Dumb-ass faggot. And yes, all of 4chan is dogshit, which is due to people like you.

I think this board is pretty good !! There's lots to love !! Plenty to learn !! A whole world of treasures !!

most 4chan users are dumb af so there's no point trying to discuss anything with them

>>24666408
I'm not the one complaining about people getting in my way. You are.

You act as though your brain is far too big to move through a hallway.
>There's no reason to come on 4chan for intellectual gratification.

You're defeating yourself here. Again, getting in your own way.

>/lit
>Lit
should be bannable offences

>>24666438
Explain why.

>>24665376 (OP)
>how do we improve the board
Why do you think you can improve anything? Who are you and why should we care? This leads to the problem; once you think you're someone who matters, the conversation revolves around you, not the board. You cant mitigate retards, but you dont have reply to them, and just because it's effort posting doesnt mean it isnt retarded, yet if you ignore it all everyone leaves. As quality improves, more people arrive. As more people arrive, so too do more retards. And as more retards arrive, quality goes down to their level. You can tell them to fuck off but the depths of autism will inevitably accumulate in a deluge requiring moderation. Strict moderation destroys the board as well.

So what to do? Find something you enjoy and enjoy it while it lasts. Leave if you dont. Return if you feel like it. Be the change you want to see without the ego.

>>24666426
You refer to "getting in my way." What is this way you speak of? I'm not attached to any way in particular. I just want to see paths being made and traveled, not dead-ends.
>You act as though your brain is far too big to move through a hallway.
You act like you're above civil discussion. Which in my experience is often a haughty, contrarian reaction to haughty, stifling formalism. You hate the pretentiousness of it. But you pretend that you're better merely because you abandon all pretense of decorum.

Let me turn the tables on you. Who gave you the right to level all these judgments? Whatever right you have, I have the same right. So there's no point in pretending that you're above it all either.

All I'm saying is that I want to see good explanations made, and I want to see all the evidence taken into consideration. And I see way too many people get combative and personal for no reason. Everybody has an axe to grind. And I guess I have an axe to grind against the axe grinders now that it has reached this point where discussion has trickled to almost nothing.

>>24666444
I hear your plea for help and attention but I cannot be bothered. Your brain is just too big for me to comprehend.

>>24665376 (OP)
A third of the threads aren't even about books. They're thinly veiled /pol/ or /his/ threads that should have been moved.

>>24666460
I'd rather you drop a knowledge bomb for everybody and then disappear than to give me attention. But Lord knows you're incapable of anything but posturing, even when you're anonymous. It's pathetic.

>>24666441
dead giveaway of lack of lurking

>>24666338
Topkek

>>24666442
>do nothing
Thanks grandpa.

>>24665387
I think that there is just not enough people to maintain a strong board culture. I've been calling for years to have /fit/ and /lit/ combined, even for a short while, just to help concentrate the decent anons. Just as much as the site had to expand due to usage, it needs a contraction phase.

pareto principle
reets will reet

>>24665764
I agree. I swear one of the main problems is peoples internet usage exceeds their reading time. And peoples brains are being rewired by the internet instead of reading/writing.

Long story short, people need to spend more time in deep reading and writing, and actually limit/reduce their internet time.

>>24665764
>>24665784
I think you are hitting the nail on the head.

>>24666545
That's not what I said at all, newfaggot, and if you lurked an appropriate amount you'd know I'm right.

>>24665376 (OP)
Just reduce the scope of the problem. Focus on making good posts and threads and ignoring bad ones.

It's really that simple. The board is not the board. The board can be just the enclave of threads and posts that are good, the rest containment for the retards, schizos, baiters and /pol/ crossposters. If you're in a good thread, don't respond to bait, don't get derailed, don't abandon just because a few bad faith actors try to clamor for attention. Make liberal use of the filter thread and hide post features. Remember that most of these people are mentally ill junkies trying to get their fix of dopamine by racking up (you)s. All you have to do is stop rewarding this behavior and the behavior will extinguish.

In short, starve the trolls by ignoring them completely.

>>24665792
You make a good point. The chan of the past was created from people simply having fun. Some would say for the lulz. If the board turns into a place of reading and writing assignments, we all might as well go to school.

>>24665887
I would say its because most anons read /lit/ more than they read lit.

>>24665384
Once you realize imageboards are cyclic you know that there is no need to fix it and that the next iteration is about to happen

>>24665837
Porn and moe ARE good. There isn't enough of either on /a/ in 2025.

>>24665403
/ck/ can be decent but it has a shitload of shilling

>>24665384
Fpbp. Every now and again, though, if you keep a watchful eye, you'll find a thread that breaks the mold

>>24665376 (OP)
Its all my fault. Whoops.

>>24665376 (OP)
>No jezebel op pics: prune instantly
>No frog reaction op pics: bots or phone poster thirties. prune on sight
>One topical thread per thinker in the catalogue
>"What did I think of X" — perma ban
>A sticky for prominent Author Deaths
>A sticky for notable publishers' sales
>Pin Writing General to ensure max reply usage

>>24665385
Moves too fucking fast because bad faith 'raids' and betting under the assumption this place is worth 'influencing', and mongoloids that refuse to check the catalogue

>>24665764
WG's genre fiction focused (and smut). /x/ creepypastas' ubiquity speaks for itself (and engage with the canon holistically at least without the nescient lense of the last 200 years of scientis'tism)

>>24665792
>What made /lit/ (and 4chan and the internet) good was

Functional range-banning of non-developed nations. Make them show the agency and front some cash for a VPN, or accept the figital locust plague

>>24665776
>self-help solicitation blogs from >>>adv
>muh huwhitey male author publisher displacement astroturf
>literal "rec incel trope novels' astroturf

Literally one of (you) itt are the janitorial solution, once a week hack and slash pruning alone would do actual proactive board culture wonders

>>24665376 (OP)
If you retards still haven't figured out the reasons 4chan sucks more than ever, here they are:

1. Most of the threads are started by bots, on ALL boards.
2. 4chan has become overrun by poojets and trannies.

Literally more than half of the guys you're talking to on /lit/ are indians and trannies and /lit/ is not even that populated so imagine how it's like on other boards.

>>24666324
>/lit/ is a slow enough board so that there is space on
>/lit/ for every topic done well.

False, it's lightspeed compared to the past. Trash polluting the catalogue abounds. Intolerant gatekeepers is the only guarantor of quality.

>>24666957
I like the sticky ideas. Even a recommendation sticky would be good.

for starters a zizek sticky

>>24666988
Mandatory skin color checks should be implemented.

>>24666992
>Even a recommendation sticky would be good.
The sticky already links to recommendations, and has half a dozen charts. You've never actually looked, have you?

>>24666574
We need a sign that says “DON’T FEED THE TROLLS.”

Wow doubter

>>24665376 (OP)
someone didn't make this organically by the way just because they were divinely inspired doesn't mean that its you. It's what you might want, but I don't make it myself.

>>24665376 (OP)
>How do we improve this board?
at this point, by completely changing the population