We will make 4chan without /pol/ and /b/

>>135906 (OP)
They serve as containments. Although they don't always work so maybe we should trial a period of removing them and banning anyone who tries to shit up the other boards.

>>135906 (OP)
>>136232
No, without them then it wouldn't really be 4chan, imo

>>135906 (OP)
Honestly I really wouldn't mind that, they give the site a really bad rep and the users (especially ones from /pol/, /b/tards don't seem to use other boards) shit up other boards with their retarded bullshit.
>>136232
They'd just go to their own site, like what happened with that one board that I don't think we're allowed to mention anymore due to recent events.

ree

>>136243
This is important.
Normiefags dont bring anything, ever. /Pol/ and /b/ filter them hard.

pol has it's place it just needs to be managed carefully.

>>135906 (OP)
removing /pol/ and /b/ would only breach containment and the posters from those boards would migrate to other boards.

>>136522
just remove porn from /b/ and it would be fine. there is already enough porn boards there is no need for it

>>135906 (OP)
We need /b/ because that's the board for anything that doesn't have it's own board.
If you nuked /pol/ and /r9k/ and then tanked the backlash, you'd greatly improve the quality of boards.

>>136522
>mum containment
They already do that anyway. Containment that fails to contain is a failure.

>>136552

>>136232
the containment theory was proven false in 2016 - 2020, it doesn't work