What is your opinion on minors (people under the age of 18) using 4chan, moot? Of course you are required by federal law to prevent the illegal viewing of adult material by underage users, but what is your PERSONAL opinion on them? Do you condone their using your site? Do you condemn them because of the material on here? What do you consider to be the youngest you'd think a user should be in order to maturely and appropriately interact on this website? Seeing how you created this site at only 15-years old yourself, you're bound to have at least SOME opinion on this issue. Especially considering how minors make up a significant portion of the users on this site, your views regarding their presence is important. Of course you can't allow for them to knowingly use this site, nor can you change your rules regarding age limits, but your opinion despite this restrictions is valuable nevertheless.>TL;DR: What is your opinion on underage users on 4chan, moot?For everyone else, what are your opinions? Of course very young children shouldn't be allowed and immature kids, such as 12-year old kids and the like, shouldn't use this site. What of adolescents, though? Are users aged 14-17 really such an issue? Or is there just a misconception around that part of the userbase and they're targeted simply due to their age (ageism)? What is your opinion? Many of you have undoubtedly used 4chan before you were 18 and some of you still may, so try to consider the effects your opinions would have on those who are currently in the position you were in. For those of you who did/do use 4chan before you're 18, did/does your usage of this site help or hinder you more? Did it help you develop your views and beliefs, or did it traumatize you? Remember that this is an anonymous board, so there's no need to reveal your age, especially if you're underage.
In my opinion, your age does not matter. What matters is how mature you are and how much you contribute.
>>155040which comes largely with more age.
The only real problem with the current system is a lack of reading and an apparently very common misunderstanding: underage people seem to think that because a board is blue and wasn't listed on the front page under 18+, they can disregard the global rule. Lurk when you're underage and get a feel for the board's etiquette and writing style (for instance, no fucking emotes gaiafag) before posting and you're fine.>targeted simply due to their age (ageism)?>ageismThis is hilarious though, seeing as the only people who genuinely think age doesn't matter are people who haven't experienced enough to know the difference. Thanks to the internet, it'll be much easier for people who are 14-17 now to come back in five years and see how much of a faggot they were then.
Don't really care as long as they're productive to the thread and don't shitpost.
> Are users aged 14-17 really such an issue?I would say "not really", but US regulations and, for that matter, the whole perception of adulthood in global culture is fucked. So you should be talking to your local regulator, or sending some letters to United Nations.tl;dr, rule 2.
I personally think that underage users are not only crucial to this website, but it can also help those individuals develop into better people. Although there is a lot of negative stigma and misconceptions surrounding this website, I think this place can actually help people very much. Not only does this provide for a place to discuss virtually any topic without fear of identification or condemnation, but it also protects your privacy and security in a way that keeps you from being tracked or found without your consent or by actively disclosing information about yourself. This is a place where controversy is welcomed and people debate, argue, and discuss issues in a way that can't be found anywhere else. People don't hold back with their opinions here and I find that very refreshing.Moreover, this site provides for a refuge for socially awkward, morbid, or otherwise unique individuals who just don't "fit in" with the rest of the crowd. This website is like a society of the antisocial, where the introverts congregate to express themselves in an extroverted manner, all behind a mask of relative anonymity. This place helps those people, whether they are underage or elderly (or somewhere in-between), develop and explore their beliefs, opinions, and views on numerous topics, some of which are either taboo or too controversial for conventional websites and social situations. Of course some people can be offended, hurt, traumatized, or led astray by the content on this site, but that is a risk people take when they enter here. Just as long as you're mentally and emotionally stable, however, it's unlikely that this site will damage you in any way.>>CONTINUED<<
>>155125In short, this website helps people and it can definitely expose minors to the harshness of reality and those in it. Due to this, I fully support underage users interacting and posting on this site, despite the illegality of those actions. Just as long as you contribute quality content and post with integrity, why should your age matter?>>155016I'll just assume you aren't 15 because if so, that means you would be permab&. Just remember that.>>155040>>155106I agree completely.>>155072Sometimes, but not always.>>155088I doubt underage users don't recognize that this site is for users 18+ only. Even if not, I seriously doubt that would stop them from using it, anymore than a age consent warning on a pornography site would. As for ageism, that is illegitimate discrimination against people specifically or solely due to their age. While discrimination based on age can be valid in some circumstances, just like with race or weight or height, to demean someone's position or opinion based on the simple fact that they are younger is illogical and inappropriate. There is illegitimate and legitimate discrimination and ageism is the former.>>155107I'm not arguing the legality of the issue or whether moot should defy it, only what his (and your) opinion is regarding it.
>Are users aged 14-17 really such an issue? I only hang out in /hm/, and when you have underage boys posting naked photos and sometimes sharing videos of themselves jerking off, getting fucked, or playing with dildos, and it seems as if everyone on there is OK with it, you start to think the whole gay community on 4chan consists of a bunch of pedophiles.Those under 18 are allowed on various parts of 4chan, just not in the adult content areas where nudity is posted.
>>155072You kidding? Most people stay immature assholes their whole lives.
>>155145>Those under 18 are allowed on various parts of 4chan, just not in the adult content areas where nudity is posted.However, nothing stops a user from posting porn on any board, which may be illegal for minors to view. The global 18+ was to stop any legal issues resulting from that.In my opinion, as long as people don't shitpost and don't make retarded spelling and grammar errors (like using "it's" when they mean "its" or vice versa) I am okay with slightly younger people on 4chan. I was that age once, though, so I know that embarrassing things happen. Part of growing up, though.
i think a lot of the problems that people complain about (shitposting, responding to shitposting, etc) are from underage posters. but, there are a lot of people who are underage who contribute positively and lots who are overage who do not.
>>155145Well just as long as those users don't post nude images of themselves or other minors, I don't see the issue with them going on porn-related boards. And by the way, we're talking about adolescents, not children. Pedophilia has no association.>>155165High School never ends.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrxI_euTX4A
Personally, if you're under 18 and view here during the summer, please leave. If you do (or did) stay after the school season starts, you're either a) horrible confused, b) a fag from /b/ or /soc/ or even /r9k/, or c) you're Anon material.I don't mind as long as they don't become tripfags.
>>155143Seeing as many of the underage who admit to being underage have argued it's "well this is a blue board", it's apparently not that common of knowledge. And no, that doesn't stop them, the problem is underage people admitting to being underage. You can't seek them out if they keep under the radar.I'd like to understand where ageism is ever relevant, so if you could provide examples I would appreciate it. The only things I can think of seem irrelevant at first glance, but aren't - specifically>posting, critical thought, insurance rates, voting, drinking, employment, etc. for young people>medical treatment, insurance rates, treatment by the service industry, etc. for old people
>>155201Why would most of the shitposting stem from underage users? There is a mass misconception that people who use emoticons and have spelling errors or shitpost are probably underage. In reality, those people are just mentally immature or failtrolling, not actually a minor.>>155208>implying people would come here only during a certain season"Summerfag" is simply a seasonal manifestation of "newfag cancer," meant to insult and entice the insulted into responding. In reality, "summerfags" don't even exist because those who frequent /b/ likely do so year-round, regardless of whether they have school or not. It's not like they don't have time to. I hate it because it insinuates the offender knows something about me he or she does not, thus rendering them the idiot. Unfortunately, any reply whatsoever will be deemed as "proof" that I'm a "summerfag." In reality, I've been coming here for years and while I'm not all that proud of being a frequent 4channer, it's irritating when some jackass insults me by telling me all those years I wasted browsing this shithole doesn't exist, all because I'm posting during the summer/winter/whatever excuse season.Also>implying /b/ or /r9k/ is badI seriously doubt tripcode usage and underage users have any correlation.
Revealing underage status is suicide for ethos; you're a fucking idiot if you choose to do so. If you want to talk amongst adults, go ahead, but fuck's sake! Take advantage of the anonymity here.
>>155179>>155202When you have threads like this one being created...>>>/hm/257071where you can't tell the age of the boys, as they have no body hair, or they have been shaved, but their faces look like they can be anywhere from 12-18..it's bothersome. Having young kids on a porn board isn't a good idea. They may post themselves naked, or be only into really young looking twinks their age and post content like the above... I don't see how it's a good idea at all to allow underagers on 18+ only boards.
>>155218If someone states a valid opinion and people agree, only to have those same people (or others) say their opinion is invalid just because they are a minor after the person reveals their age, that is ageism. If someone has information that can help a situation, but their ability to provide it is impeded because others think that since they are young, it must be fallacious, that is ageism. Voting age restrictions are also ageist because it restricts informed youth from providing an opinion while still allowing uninformed or paid-off adults cast their vote ignorantly. Denying someone medical treatment or aid because they are younger than another person of equal need is ageist, as well. Saying that someone's opinion has a higher tendency to be fallacious or less logical the younger the individual is can be appropriate, but to discriminate or generalize against youth under the presumption that it will be fallacious or less logical is discriminatory, illegitimate, and ageist.>>155226I agree. I've had that issue MANY times before when I was younger. I'd reveal my age and even if I just said something very intelligent, poof! My opinion is magically shit.
>>155252Femininity and an embracing of a youthful experience among homosexual males is common. Some of them may be underage images and that is wrong, of course, but that doesn't mean they all are. Of course allowing minors on a site with user-submitted pornographic content can be dangerous and lead to child pornography in some cases, that doesn't mean it will happen or even be common. Adolescents can post nude images of themselves on 4chan already and they'll be removed just as quickly (or slowly). There are many outlets for adolescents and children to distribute their content; there always have and always will be. A certain level of individual responsibility is necessary, however. People who commit crimes or make poor decisions will receive consequences for their actions. They will eventually either learn or fall behind.
>>155252another thread >>>/hm/256389most likely made by some underage faggot. I can't even tell if the photo is illegal CP or not, it could be. It's gross.
>>155301Well, yes. That's how it works here. When in Rome, do as the Romans do, etc. You know. I understand that it's frustrating when you're an intelligent poster despite being underage, but if you're really smart, you'll know not to announce you're a minor.
>>155226Pretty much this. If you can conduct yourself well, and don't type like you're a fucking retard, I don't care if you're 8 or 80.Make sure to report >>155016, BTW!
>>155332This. I don't get why a minor would reveal their age here.
>>155313Like I said, homosexual males try to look certain types, one of which is appearing young, boyish, and effeminate. That thread you linked to is just a discussion, though, and they have every right to talk about it, no matter how much you may disagree or disapprove of it. If there was child pornography being posted, then that's terms for reporting and terming it illegal content. Discussing a topic, albeit taboo, is and should not be ousted, though.>>155332Well, that should be apparent. My question is pertaining to moot's opinion on the fact that underage users frequent this site, regardless of whether they reveal their age, and if he approves or condones it. There is also a lot of animosity toward underage users on 4chan, especially on the /b/, /v/, and /mu/ boards. I think this is unjustified and ageist, hence my discontent.>>155341Nah. He didn't shitpost, so why care? I do treat people who reveal their age without justifiable cause just like how I treat girls (or those who claim to be girls) who flaunt their sexuality without first adhering to Rules #30 & #31: they are attention-seeking and should be ostracized for their cancerous shitposting. Oh and in case anyone hadn't noticed by now, I'm a /b/tard and have been for years. I see underage posting and hateful comments toward said underage posters all the time.
>>155125>4chan>better peopleOn that note... (cough)You can't inherently control who will and won't come on to a website.You learn, in time, what to say and what not to say on specific boards. Users will develop and adapt accordingly or they'll forget about 4chan and won't come back. Underage users will be on any website they want to, be it 4chan or xxxbunker.
>>155125You're right, by the way.
>>155364>>155376Concur and danke.
Well even if they did allow underage people to browse 4chan, what are we gonna do about the people that are currently banned for being underage?This is just like legalizing marijuana.
>>155405Banning underage users on an "adult/mature site" is a federal law, so I doubt it'll change anytime soon. Even if it did, though, the ones banned for being underage could just send an e-mail to moot about it to investigate the IP Address in question and why it was banned, or perhaps open up a new appeals process specifically for that.
Just put on that underage people aren't allowed in non-work safe forums and the job's done.Alot of underage users are productive, alot of them are a pain in the ass. But that works for the 18+ fuckers as well. So who cares?
>>155405>This is just like legalizing marijuana.No, no it isn't.
>>155016Shit man, you're hardcore!
>>155434>Just put on that underage people aren't allowed in non-work safe forums and the job's done.no the job wouldn't be, it would just encourage them to shitpost, and encourage 18+ users to shitpost as them. i'm all for lenient moderation on the issue, but don't open up the gates.
>>155434I doubt even that would be possible because of the federal laws regarding adult site age restrictions, though that would certainly be something moot can clear up. Well, if he ever addresses this thread or issue. I personally think it would only work in theory, but not in practice. I wouldn't mind having the >>>/fk/ board actually open up, though. That would be shitpost central, better than /b/.>What is /fk/?It was a troll board moot made as a secret joke. >>>/fk/
>>155450So they have something to talk about 4chan "Giving free pornography for underage people", or even worse?No-one's going to follow the rule, it's just something to keep the police out of our asses.
So long as they don't post awful content everywhere like the underage kids they are, it doesn't bother me. We all break petty laws sometimes, I guess.Personally, I am 18. But started using 4chan when I was just 13. Like that other guy said who's post I can't find now that I want to quote it - I had the common sense not to announce my age and certainly not act it, either.
Whenever I see MLP or someone underage I automatically report.
>>155459How wouldn't it work?I guess it's kinda hard to do something better than /b/, /b/ turned out to be unique because it's somewhere useless without any flag that people started gathering together to do whatever the fuck they wanted. And then it got famous, and we know all the kind of fags we have up there those days.But I think your idea on a new board sounds kinda cool. Not a trollboard, but something different.
I am against underage users. They have a lack of experience or understanding of a board's culture or history, they very likely have less knowledge and understanding of the subject the board is dedicate to, they are very likely to be far less mature and intelligent than older posters.Obviously there will be exceptions, and obviously every single underage poster reading this will think they are one of those exceptions, but it is undeniable that on average 17 year olds are less intelligent, less mature and more emotionally unstable when compared to 22 year olds.Plus, there is a direct relationship between the average age on a board and the quality of it's posters. /tg/ vs /v/ is an example.To any underage kids reading this, I can only recommend you make an effort to lurk more and post less, do not assume that every board is like /b/ or /v/, and do make an effort to post with acceptable grammar.
I started lurking when I was twelve and figured out that this place isn't for half baked thoughts, emoticons, and "lulz anonimiss is lejun". I posted accordingly.What matters here is maturity. Posts that are thorough and constructive are tagged as good posting and vice-versa. Age doesn't change that.As long as they aren't getting ballsy about it, just be lenient on the subject.
>>155520You do realize that alot of people in /tg/ are smart underages and alot of people in /v/ are also 18+ jerks, right?You claim you know about exceptions existing, but you act like there's almost none. And let's be honest, even though, most of the times, /b/ and /v/ are completely annoying and stupid, they make us laugh at some point.The varying intellect of users in different boards is not because of the direct relation between age and maturity, but because of the level of intellect the people that visit that board usually have and requires from visitors.Take /sci/ for example.Now /x/.Now fucking /b/.
>>155016PRESENT YOUR PICKAXE OR ENJOY A BAN
If I were moot, I'd raise the age requirement to 21 and force you to prove it.There is no such thing as a smart teenager. No, you are not an exception.gb2 NeopetsFucking kids.
>>155502With MLP, I can understand that. Why with underage users, though, so long as they're not shitposting? Additionally, how do you know it's not just a troll posing as an underage kid, thus making the report frivolous.>>155511It wouldn't work because it would just entice people to break the rules more, as well as attract more minors, the majority of whom aren't mature whatsoever. As for a new board, I already suggested to moot a "/phi/ - Philosophy" board numerous times and sent him an e-mail appeal regarding it.Pic related: http://i.imgur.com/sWtsQ.png
>>155520You're bordering ageist discrimination. Understanding the website's culture and history is quite easy if you actually invest some time into studying it and not posting until you recognize the patterns and behaviors on each board. Of course they may not have (as much) first-hand experience with the history and culture of /b/, but that doesn't mean they won't learn or can't try. Regarding maturity and intelligence, there is little correlation or causation between them and one's age. Mental maturity and intellect can develop independently from one's age and this is evident throughout society. Some people never grow up or think logically, even after they become adults. Instead of discriminating based on age and other generalized categories, evaluate people on an individualized basis.As for the "averages" you claimed, I seriously doubt that. Care to provide evidence? The people who actually apply themselves in the most recent generations are smarter, more logical, and intuitive than the previous ones. Those people may be a minority, but the fact of the matter is that education is better than ever in contemporary society and people are learning about things years before their parents and grandparents did in school. Regarding the alleged relationship between the mean age of the userbase and the quality or integrity of a board, there is none. How could you even measure that, much less know even if you could? That sounds like more of a baseless, subjective opinion than an objective claim.>>155581I beg to differ. Would you consider me "smart"? What about if I were, say, only 16?
>>155587>Why with underage users, though, so long as they're not shitposting?If they are demonstrably underage, then they are dumb as bricks.>Additionally, how do you know it's not just a troll posing as an underage kid, thus making the report frivolous.Then they should be reported for trolling.
>>155602Trolling isn't terms for reporting on /b/, the place where the most underage claims and posts are made. What would you say about that?
Moot already mentioned he's not opposed to lowering the age limit for SFW boards.
>>155621Do you have a citation or link to this? I'm genuinely intrigued.
>>155587I don't think that would make everyone try to break every single rule. I guess age is something that nobody cares much in the internet anymore. But I understand your argument, and it is not wrong.I liked the idea of the /phi/ board, and I support it. Would be good to have somewhere to talk about philosophy. Might take some time for people to actually notice it, though.
>>155614I'd say that I don't give a damn about /b/, and that reporting anything there is an exercise in futility.
>>155614/b/ is a shithole either way.>>155628He lowered them once and everyone threw a fit, so he made the miners joke.
4chan = Born at the age of 35.None of us were ever kids.
as long as you're not a shitposting faggot I don't really care what age you are.
this whole thread>TL ; DR15fag here tooIt doesn't matter how mature you are -- it is LAW either way zero shits given, mootles was 15 when he started the site - i think he humors us underage users.
>>155637Perhaps not every rule, but definitely ones pertaining to age and possibly even child pornography.>>155643I wish it wasn't.>>155646The miners joke?>>155658That seems to be the major consensus.
If they're obviously underage, whether they directly say it or let it be found out indirectly, ban them.I'm not so much against minors being on the site as much as I am against obvious minors being on the site. If they come off as mature, aren't gigantic faggots, and aren't so sloppy as to allow people to find out their age, let them stay.
Ban anyone under 30.
>>155680He made the rule for about a week say, "Only MINERS are allowed on 4chan, if you are above the age of 18 and not a miner, you must discontinue posting. You must provide your own pickaxe."
Honestly i'm 15 and i've been coming here every day since I was 11. I've always been a loner with few friends but it fucked me up pretty bad. I like to think i've always been a good contributor although I did do some shitty trolling back in the day.
>>155691That'll solve a lot. Good luck verifying every user.>>155698Ah yeah, I remember hearing about that. Oh moot, you so silly.
>>155700I'd like to think you're a /b/ poster.
>>155700>i've been coming here every day since I was 11you lie. you lie poorly.
>>155680>I wish it wasn't.Can't always get what you want. At least most other boards aren't wholly uninteresting shitholes.
>>155700>>155708Indeed, my friend. I thought the same as you.
>>155719/b/ is a place for intentional shitposting. It's where everyone from all the other boards go to when they're either bored, can't find interesting content on their own board(s), or simply wish to troll/shitpost. People know this (or should by now). There's nothing "random" about the board. It's just a sink for the stupidity of 4chan in order to keep the other boards having good content.
>>155722> It's where everyone from all the other boards go to when they're either bored, can't find interesting content on their own board(s), or simply wish to troll/shitpostI have absolutely never done that in my life. and I weird for not craving to shit post like a child on my free time?
>>155739This.That's why /b/ cannot be deleted.But sadly it's getting worse then I thought it could get, every single day. And I'm talking about the people that actually only get on 4chan because they want to be /B/ROS ANON IS LEJUN.I'd like to also say that most of these people are also immature teenagers that only make underage users look like shit in this website. What a shame.
/b/ has turned much shittier than I thought, to be honest. And despite /b/ being a sink for stupidity on 4chan, I'm a devoted /b/tard and have been for years. Why? I find the stupidity and shitposting amusing. I go to other boards for quality content. /b/ was never good and I'm glad for that.
>>155722>>155716>>155708Although I can provide no proof I assure you I am not lying. I browsed /b/ for about the first 2 years I was here but I no longer do. The boards I frequent are in no particular order are: /tg/, /x/, and /r9k/.
>mfw all these people defending people under 18 browsing 4chan[spoiler]Underage faggots, the lot of you.[/spoiler]
>>155814And all people who oppose racism are blacks? Great logic there.
>>155814Good thing you can't abuse spoilers here, retard.
>>155802I understand.We all have to be honest about this, most users that are in 4chan for at least 3 years (more or less) are usually here because they heard of /b/ first.I browsed /b/ for eight months until I got tired of the bullshit in it and kept myself to /x/, /sci/, /diy/ and, sometimes, /mu/, only.
The posting system is anonymous. If you don't out yourself as underage, nobody will know. Underage users will continue to use the site as long as they don't act like immature shits, and that's the way it should be.
The shitposting has to do with the intelligence of posters not age.
>>155600>Would you consider me "smart"? What about if I were, say, only 16?If you deliberately come to a place where the rules clearly state that you have to be 18+ and are only 16, then there is no part of you that is smart.Sure, you might get away with it, but that doesn't make you smart.There is no such thing as a smart teenager. They are all idiots. Every last damn one of them. That's why they're not allowed to enter into legal contracts, vote, buy liquor, or be out after dark in most major cities. They're idiots.I'm not saying there aren't adults who are idiots, but it isn't the default. A few years of life experience, away from Mommy, counts for a lot. If you don't know that, then you are 16 and need to get the fuck off 4chan.
>>155818The difference being racism leads to legitimate inequities in society and is unfair and discriminatory. Banning underage posters does not do this. The only people who are sympathetic to underage posters are those who are underage themselves or those who once were underage and posted on 4chan regardless. Underage posters should not, under any circumstances, be allowed on 4chan due to the fact that most, not all, are shitposters who just want to browse their lulsoedgy board.
>>155520You're f-f-f-full of shit.
>>155863Oh, come on. Don't generalize like that. There are all sorts of precocious kids out there, although they are FAR in the minority. But as you say, they really aren't all that smart if they choose to reveal they're a minor.
>>155865>The only people who are sympathetic to underage posters are those who... want to have sex with minors.Period.
Let's pretend for a moment that I'm 15. I'm going to speak in-character, as I would if I were 15.I visited 4chan for the first time about a year and a half ago. I was led to it by Encyclopedia Dramatica articles, which I discovered when I was 12 or so. I'd also read about 4chan on many different sites over the years. I inadvertently read many articles on ED that were directly related to /b/, like Cockmongler, moot, the Habbo raids and others. This gave me a pretty good idea of /b/'s culture long before I first ventured there.Then one day, I visited. I met the monster that is /b/ and lurked for a very long time. I saw porn, I saw gore, I saw everything that it had to offer, and I identified with many of its people. They were like me. Lonely, stranded, nowhere to go. The all-singing, all-dancing crap of the earth. So I stayed. I didn't really explore other boards for a while. I mostly just hung around a looked at the vast sea of randomness. Then, about 6 months ago, I made my first post on /b/. I began commenting on things very infrequently, generally only to compliment a particularly fine pair of tits or to call someone out for being a pathetic Reddit user.
>>155863>There is no such thing as a smart teenager. They are all idiots. Every last damn one of them. That's why they're not allowed to enter into legal contracts, vote, buy liquor, or be out after dark in most major cities. They're idiots.>I'm not saying there aren't adults who are idiots, but it isn't the default. A few years of life experience, away from Mommy, counts for a lot. If you don't know that, then you are 16 and need to get the fuck off 4chan.This guy gets it. Also >go to report every underage poster here>"You or someone with your IP has already reported this post" Huh, someone who goes to my University is browsing this thread. Who'dda thunk.
>>155874Precocious does not mean they're capable of adult reasoning. Awww, it's cute how they quote Shakespeare and can win spelling bees, but that doesn't mean they understand adult society.
>>155882And I began branching out into other boards. I lurked for a while before I posted - took some time to learn how things worked. When I found myself commenting on things in my head, I'd start to post. People generally accepted me, as much as people accept anyone here, unless I said something really stupid. The image and wallpaper boards welcomed me as an image editor. /mu/ initially laughed at me, but gave me advice and introduced me to what are now some of my favorite artists. And through it all, I only mentioned my age a few times. The one thing I noticed about this is that everyone accepted my posts and talked with me, whether they agreed or disagreed, but the second I mentioned an age, they were out of there. It was only when I told them how old I was that they tried to send me out of whatever thread I was in.The reactions varied, from "You're trolling, people your age can't spell" to "You're lying, you pathetic virgin faggot" when I mentioned that I wasn't a virgin, to "underageb&! underageb&! go back to mommy now, little boy!". Those mostly just made me laugh. But the ones I always LIKED? Those were the people that, upon learning my age, talked to me based on how they knew me as a person during our brief conversation, not as the number I affiliated myself with. In the end, it's up to the individual user to decide what he thinks about age. moot can't decide that for us. But I, personally, and I am of course biased, think that as long an individual contributes positively to the community and doesn't act like the stereotype for their age, then there is no real reason for them to leave. Perhaps there's reason for someone to TELL us to leave, but we've already been exposed. We know what we want. A little "18+" disclaimer isn't going to keep us out.But I'm not really 15, am I?
>collegefags thinking they're so much more mature than high school kiddies
>>155896This.All it is is one level up the totem pole of shit.
>>155890>moot can't decide that for us.THAT proves you're 15.Why? Because yes, yes moot CAN decide that for us. 4chan belongs to moot, 100%, lock stock and barrel.Only idiot 15 year olds think they have the right to be here and that they're owed 4chan. No amount of flowery language and $10 words can change that.
>>155896>>155902That one step up the totem pole matters. When you've been away from Mommy for a couple of years, paid your own rent, bought your own food, and dealt with your own crap; then you've earned a little bit bigger slice of pie.That's how it works, kiddo.
>>155889I knew a 17 year old who had been orphaned at age 12. He was able to lead his father's company to success with self-study, deal with adult politics and come off as more knowledgeable and mature than most adults. I'm not here to white-knight for kids, but if you think there aren't a handful of extraordinary ones among the hundreds of millions out there, well...
>>155863So, open defiance to a law or rule you deem unjust or unfair and not causing any damage in doing so is not considered smart? If so, the what constitutes being "smart"? Listening to what you're told? Avoiding conflict? By smart, I usually consider that to be attributes such as logical decision-making, critical thinking, a good vocabulary, and knowledge on various complex or thoughtful concepts and topics. Just because you are ageist and biased against adolescents, that in no way justifies your claims, nor does that render them accurate in any way. There are many smart adolescents and there has been over the centuries, including Albert Einstein, Stephen Hawking, Michio Kaku, and Napoleon Bonaparte to just name a few.The reason why adolescents are restricted from certain rights are either out of protection or due to ignorance and bigotry. You are resembling the latter quality quite well. Why should external laws and dictations determine the "smartness" of an individual? If they don't, then why are you making claims that exhibit that very thinking. If it's true that there are no smart teenagers, then you must be 13 yourself.>>155865People who are sympathetic with a discriminated minority are considered apologists and defenders. You don't have to be a part of that minority to represent or defend it.
>>155914What, you knew Bruce Wayne?I want to research your claim. What was the orphaned 12 year old's name and the name of the company.
>OMG I'm so adult I'm so edgy I'm so mature I'm so smart no teenagers are allowed around me they're all stoopid.You've got to be fucking kidding me.We all know most teenagers are stupid, but you are stereotyping to much.And the funny thing is that whoever is moaning about this, generally, is a stereotype themself.This is an anonymous board. If you can't let them know you're underage, nobody will care.
>>155914>rare exceptions justify the access of all kiddies to 4chanNo. And all the kiddies seem to think that they are the rare exception to the rule when they actually embody the rule itself perfectly.
>>155905I'm not sure if you misunderstood me. I meant that moot could not decide how the users felt collectively about underage people on the boards. moot can decide how he feels, but he can't lay down the law and make everyone else feel the same way. For example, I'm pretty sure we all agree that Taylor Swift should play a concert for deaf kids, but do we all agree that everyone underage should leave? Obviously, no, not by the welcome I've received from some parts of the 4chan community.
>>155922>open defiance to a law or rule you deem unjust or unfairGet a few more years on you and you'll understand exactly why it isn't unjust.>People who are sympathetic with a discriminated minority are considered apologists and defenders. You don't have to be a part of that minority to represent or defend it.Very true. But underage posters on 4chan aren't discriminated against.
>>155922Civil Disobedience and Protest are essential parts of society. Protesting injustice, such as "Whites Only" or defying the law that doesn't allow Women to vote is fine.Being 16 and defiantly going to a place that is 18+ is NOT fighting social injustice. Do you not see the difference?Here, I'll help you out: You won't stop being a woman or black in 2 years. You WILL stop being a minor in 2 years.
>>155927>We all know most teenagers are stupid, but you are stereotyping to much.See >>155929Stop being underage.
>>155925>Bruce WayneHaha... It was nothing on that level. The company was a medium-sized wholesale beauty supply department called...Come now, what the hell makes you think I'd post someone's real info here? I know it sounds grandiose, but you'll just have to take my word for it.>>155929I know that and agree. I'm just saying it's possible, and that one shouldn't entirely generalize.
>>155931No, he cannot tell others how they feel, but he can lay down the law.18+ is the rule no matter how YOU feel about it. You don't get to make the laws here. 4chan is not a democracy.
>>155942Fair enough. I'd like to clarify that I wasn't trying to say that the laws should be changed to make me happy. I know this is an 18+ website, and I know it's not changing any time soon and I never expect it to. This is not a site for kids, and it is never going to be. But laws are made to be broken, no? As I said, an 18+ banner won't keep me out. I can keep my mouth shut and pretend I'm older than I am, and nobody will be any the wiser.
>>155006A letter and a word: "u mad?"The fucking internet is burning down because everyone, especially these kids, go and destroy communities just for a cheap laugh. They refuse to assimilate, and yet feel entitled to stay and shit over everything.
>>155940It's funny because it doesn't make sense, like most of the arguments you've shown here.Yes, it is against the rules.No, nobody's gonna give a shit if they don't know the guy they're talking to interestingly in a board they love is an underage if they can't notice.That includes you.Good night. "Stop being underage."
>>155941>you'll just have to take my word for it.Fine. But even that 12 year old turned CEO would not be allowed here. Because that's the rules.Etta James was one of the most prolific and beloved jazz singers in the United States. She toured the country and sold albums in numbers on par with Elvis and Buddy Holly. She was worth millions.In many of the places she toured, she couldn't use the restrooms because they were "Whites Only". A million dollar singer having to piss in plastic cups behind the stage because of the rules.THAT is social injustice.Fighting this 18+ thing just makes you look whiny and butthurt.
>>155882>>155890I understand what you mean and I agree completely.>>155905moot can decide whether we have access to his site (and even that is questionable), but he CANNOT decide how I see myself or others. I have my own choice, perspective, views, personality, and beliefs. Some administrator from a random site isn't going to decide any of those for me.You must be an idiot or perhaps just a major asshole or troll. All I've read from you is hatred, bigotry, and intolerance, none of which are appropriate in this discussion. Coming from a devout /b/tard, go back to /b/ if you want to shitpost and act like a douche. We're having an intelligent discussion here, some of the people possibly even minors, and you're apparently either too incompetent or obstinate to participate in a reasonable manner. Go away.>>155935Now, you're patronizing me? How do you even know I'm a minor or underage whatsoever? If you're going to treat me like I'm less than you just because of my age, especially when you don't even know what my age is (I could easily be your elder), then you have no place discussing on this topic. And yes, underage users are discriminated against and frequently., as apparent by this thread.
>>155948>I can keep my mouth shut and pretend I'm older than I am, and nobody will be any the wiser.You haven't really been doing a good job with that so far...>>155957>Fighting this 18+ thing just makes you look whiny and butthurt.Yup, I agree. I'm not trying to fight it. I just wanted to tell the person I replied to that some kids were pretty wise for their age. Just an innocent post, really.
>>155948>But laws are made to be broken, no?No. Laws are generally made to protect people.There's a law against murder. Was that made to be broken?The 18+ rule protects 4chan's liability and I don't want the Feds shutting this place down because some idiot teenagers with unwarranted senses of self-importance feel they have the god given right to be here.
I honestly don't care if users are underaged or not.It only pisses me off when someone does mention they're underaged in a thread and everyone goes apeshit over it.
>>155962>We're having an intelligent discussion hereNo ... not really ... and your post proves it.Nobody gives a shit about your "feels".
If I cant tell they're underage I don't care but if some faggot post "giez im scarred aboot beeng a freash man next yaer" then i gett a little pissed off.
>>155962> (and even that is questionable)No, it isn't. >but he CANNOT decide how I see myself or others.And nobody ever claimed that. >>155962>All I've read from you is hatred, bigotry, and intolerance>bigotry and intoleranceYou can't be bigotted or intolerant towards the young.>>155962>Coming from a devout /b/tardAh, now it all makes sense. Why don't you go back to that shithole?>some of the people possibly even minorsA lot of them are, yourself included. >underage users are discriminated against and frequentlyBecause you believe not allowing people under 18 to browse a website is 'discrimination', it heavily suggests you are underage yourself to think something so retarded. >>155948>Laws are made to be broken, no?Typical underage argument.
>>155962>underage users are discriminated againstChild, you have no idea what discrimination is.Seriously, go back to Neopets. It's kid friendly.
Don't care unless they voice how old they are.Kids tend to be bigger shitposters, but I am well aware that there are plenty that may contribute too. I started browsing 4chan when I was around 15-16, which was about 8 years ago now, so there's nothing really that wrong with being underage.Then again, I am a massive hypocrite, but I never admitted my age because I was aware of the rules.If you're smart enough, you won't admit to your age. If you do, I will report you and hope you get banned. Though I honestly don't think underage posters get stuff like 2-year long bans any more. >>155218>Seeing as many of the underage who admit to being underage have argued it's "well this is a blue board", it's apparently not that common of knowledge. And no, that doesn't stop them, the problem is underage people admitting to being underage. This is one of my favourite excuses for underage children to justify their presence here. They usually shut the fuck up once you tell them about global rules and quickly delete their posts.
I really can't say I mind if underaged users browse, just as long as they have some common sense and not act like retards (basically what >>155016 did, posted his actual age and whatnot). I mean look at it this way: how old were you when you saw your first R-rated movie? You probably weren't even close to 18.That's how I like to look at it at least.
>>155966This is true.>>155967It's a pretty common expression that I just used there. Maybe if you didn't take me quite so literally...I don't feel like I have to god-given right to be here. I feel like if I feel the need to be here, I will find a way to be here.If I had the god-given right to be here, everyone wouldn't try to kick me out the door, yelling and screaming "underageb&!", would they?It's like porn sites. They have an 18+ disclaimer, but an easy 20% of their audience are underage. We don't have a right to be here. There are no "rights" on the internet. But we're here anyway.>>155978Jesus, this. This website is not here for the discussion of your life in the education system. >>155983>You can't be bigotted or intolerant towards the young....what? Of course you can. >>155984Got to say, though, this shit annoys me a little bit. The "Go back to neopets". Come on. You really think that once we've had a taste of this we're going to go back to the kids' table and play with our legos? >>155988I've seen so many idiots failing to realize that the entire site it 18+, not just the boards labeled "18+". They think they're right, they make a statement...then boom, b&.
>>155975>>155983>>155984These. >>155962 sounds just as you would expect an angst-ridden teenager to sound. Protip: Moot owns 4chan. That means he can forbid you entering this site because you're black, underage, female, or whatever he damn well feels like, and there is not a damn thing you can do about it. Come back when you're older and you realize what a faggot you were when you were a kid.
It wouldn't be a problem on SFW boards if their posters knew they were supposed to be SFW
>>155983Yes, it is. Ban evasion and IP Address changes are easy, thus making moot's attempts at banning users unfortunately very ineffective for those who know how to get around the issue. And what the hell do you mean, you can't be bigoted or intolerant towards the young? That's like saying women can't be sexist. You're legitimately stupid and I'll just ignore your idiocy from hereon out.>>155994This is the exact type of ageism I'm talking about. Was there any need to call me names and act so immature? You don't even have the slightest hint as to my age, so claiming I'm "an angst-ridden teenager" makes you little more than a name-calling manchild. Regardless of whether I'm younger or older than you, I at least know better than to insult you back and tell you just how pathetic you are because it serves no purpose. I save that shitposting for /b/. So should you.
>>155992> Of course you can. Actually, you can't. Ageism refers to treatment of the elderly.Is it discriminatory or bigoted that 15 year olds can't vote or sign a contract or that they have to go to school? No.Children have no rights. They only have the privileges extended to them by their parents. Children are, not to put too fine a point on it, property.
>>155994Of course he can forbid me. But will that stop me from coming here anyway? >>156002This man is correct. Ban evasion, IP changing...I have a dynamic IP. It changes monthly. If I get banned, I'll serve my time and keep my mouth shut about my age next time around. And in the meantime, I can find an unbanned proxy or go through Tor.
I'm my opinion it underage posters don't bother me. Hell, we have a few posting here already. I mean under anonmity no one really gives a shit. Here's my list of issues I have with them:>stateing your underage>using emotes (just can't take your opinion seriously if you use them)>samefag bumping trying to claim your post just to gain fame>txt speakOf course anybody can do that, but it's just more annoying and makes it obvious that you wish to just be arrogant and annoying and I do sage and report posts like this.
>>156010http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ageism
>>156011>But will that stop me from coming here anyway?If you were smart, yes. But, as I keep saying, there is no such thing as a smart teenager, so I suppose they'll always be here, being all edgy in defiance of the law.It's always funny to see those kids go to prison later in life because they think the laws don't apply to them.Being bitched at and called names and told to GTFO hurts a hell of a lot more when it's a Judge doing it.There is no shame in following rules. Unjust rules should be protested, but children have no clue as to what "unjust" means because they pout and scream "unfair!" when they're told to go to bed early because it's a school night.
>>156002>I at least know better than to insult you back and tell you just how pathetic you are because it serves no purpose.>You're legitimately stupid and I'll just ignore your idiocy from hereon out.Underage logic. Stop trying to sound intelligent. You just sound like a pretentious high school Junior who took US History or Sociology for the first time and feels the need to parrot terms like "ageism" (or anything ending in "ism"... It sounds intelligent, even if it means nothing!) You know nothing of the real world which is clearly evident in your pseudo-intellectual posts.
>>155992>...what? Of course you can. You can only be a bigot towards something that cannot be changed and doesn't disadvantage them. For example, it is bigoted not to give women the vote because they cannot change that they are female and they aren't disadvantaged when compared to other voters . It isn't bigoted to not allow underage people to vote because, in a couple years, it will have changed and they do not have the mental capacity to understand the ramifications of their voting.
>>156027Learn words before you use them.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BigotryWell, it seems like this thread has turned into a shithole for ageists, trolls, and assholes. So much for that discussion.
>>156027>>156027>>156027>>156010But you can still be intolerant towards them. Is there an animal bill of rights? No. Can you still be intolerant towards animals? Yes.That's like saying that you can't be intolerant to someone because of their race or gender. Disqualifying under-18s from the mix simply makes no sense. Bigoted: 1 - completely convinced that they are correct in every way and anyone who disagrees is wrong and stupid.2 - expressing prejudice or intolerance Hm. Let's define those.Prejudice:Preconceived opinion that is based on a notion, not real life experience.Intolerance: To quote Dictionary.com - lack of toleration; unwillingness or refusal to tolerate or respect contrary opinions or beliefs, persons of different races or backgrounds, etc.>>156022I'm not here because I want to defy the law. There's plenty of ways for me to do that that don't involve typing a URL. I'm here because I enjoy the community, images, etc.
>>156027The difference is between voting for the leaders of a country and posting on a privately owned imageboard. The latter is less serious. Though, the retards that state their age are, well, retarded.
>>156030Did you even read what you posted.>With hatred or intoleranceI'm not hating nor am I intolerant to you because you lack the kind of trait I described.
>>156035>The difference is between voting for the leaders of a country and posting on a privately owned imageboard. Exactly. Voting for the leaders of a country is practically worthless whereas ruining a privately owned imageboard is considerably worse, as it can actually have an effect.
Honestly, my only beef with allowing underage users on what are supposed to be age restricted boards, is the fact that I don't get to see all of the hilarious bans. It's been well over 3 years, maybe even longer, since I've seen an underage ban.Other than my own personal enjoyment and maybe the slight decline in quality some of them present (which isn't restricted to age, really), I don't care. It's a trivial issue in relation to many of the other problems that really require a mods attention.
>>156041I actually laughed. You do have a point, I guess.
>>156031Give it a rest already. You're going to feel silly in a couple of years when you reminisce to this occasion. I know you feel like you're putting everyone in their place with your superior logic, and maybe you are, maybe you aren't -- but regardless, you'll think it's embarrassing when you grow up. Stop it, please.
The problem really isn't the 4chan rules, it's just that underage kids are just getting dumber as a whole, with the memegenerator and nine-gag shit.
No questions asked, board wide limit should 18 and over. Even if it is a SFW board, most of the board culture isn't really suitable for younger audiences. Nothing pisses me off more than an underage stating they're underage and then saying "It's a SFW board, I don't have to be 18!"So I like the rule as it is now.As for the underage b&, I really don't care if they are on the board as it is, so as long as they shut their trap about it. Plus I've met a few underage people on 4chan that have been more mature than over 18s.I just like the boardwide age limit since it deters the more unsavoury crowd (but what can be more unsavoury than us haha)
>>156036Whoa whoa whoa. Hold up a second!>You can only be a bigot towards something that cannot be changed and doesn't disadvantage them. >For example, it is bigoted not to give women the vote because they cannot change that they are female. >It isn't bigoted to not allow underage people to vote because, in a couple years, it WILL HAVE CHANGEDI would say that this applies to what you ARE, not what you WILL be. If you look at it the way you are looking at it, it all depends on how an individual defines it. Is an underage person, then, a human being? A puppy will be a dog - does that make him any less a canine? I'm not too sure what point I'm trying to make here other than that it depends on how an individual defines it.>>156047You're right. I am indeed going to remember this some day and think "Wow, I was a dumb little kid." The good thing is that I'll remember myself as a dumb little kid that stood up and talked about what he thought was right and why he thought it than as a dumb little kid that sat down and did nothing while people pushed him around.
>>156031> I'm here because I enjoy the communityIf you respected the community, you would abide by its rules.
>>156052I know people in their twenties that do that more than younger people, but that might just be the people I know.
I don't have a problem with underages posters. I do Like the rules because it stops shit posting about being 15.And I've been here since I was 15. Like many people Including fucking m00t
>>156059>enjoy>respectTwo completely different words. Who the fucking fuck RESPECTS 4chan's community? That may be the funniest thing I've ever read.
>>155957and yet he can post and be the best poster one the forum and no one will be able to do anything about it. He can even say he is 12 and there would be no proof.
I don't care how old a user is, since I don't think maturity always scales by age, but echo what the other posters said (don't shitpost, don't be a retard and admit you're underaged, etc.). I wouldn't have a problem if moot removes the age restrictions from SFW boards like he mentioned thinking about in the past, but I'd prefer if he allowed spoilered NSFW content on those boards instead.
>>156055>board wide limit should 18 and over.And it is. 18+ is the rule, regardless of SFW or not.
>>156058If you want to put it that way, I suppose you could. I was somewhat like you when I was younger and think of myself presently as having been dumb for making such a big deal out of negligible matters, so I might just be projecting. Who knows? If you're so insistent on continuing this "debate" however, I won't stop you.
>>156055It deters nothing. No one on the Internet fucking cares when a website tells them they have to be a certain age to access it, and you're an idiot if you think otherwise.
im 15 and my friends and i go around high school spewing 4chan memes it's so fun
>>156058>The good thing is that I'll remember myself as a dumb little kid that stood up and talked about what he thought was right and why he thought it than as a dumb little kid that sat down and did nothing while people pushed him around.You're just like Rosa Parks XD!! Fight the good fight! One day society will look back and wonder how such oppression on an anonymous imageboard could ever have occurred! Rage Against the Machine has taught you so much! These ageist cis-jerks need to check their privilege!
>>156065I respect 4chan and its community because it has helped change the shape of the internet for the better.I'm not going to go into all of my reasons, but moot actually summed it up best in this video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_1UEAGCo30You gotta respect that.
>>156055I'm not asking for the rules to change because that's just not feasible. I would like moot's personal opinion on underage users, though.>>156059Respecting the community does not mean you must respect the rules it is required to follow. Even then, disobeying a rule is not disrespecting it.>>156058Ignore the trolls. Save that for /b/.
>>156065I respect my board community.
>>156058Am I the only anon who likes this kid for actually speaking out in an actual thought out post? I'd hope not.These are the kind of kids you want to see not the ones who go around doin' stupid shit because they think it will make them cool. But it's honestly quite dumb for one to hate someone simply because of their age. I think it'd be far more better for your image to hate them for the way they act and who they are.. I mean that should be common sense, no? >>156059This post is hilarious.Thanks anon.
>>156068If he goes around saying he's 12, that's proof enough.This is a privately owned company website, not a court of law. Reasonable doubt does not apply.
>>156080>No one on the Internet fucking cares when a website tells them they have to be a certain age to access itHeh, I actually found 4chan when I was 16 or 17, read the rules before going into any boards, and got right the fuck out of there - didn't come back until I was old enough. I guess I'm just a timid little bitch.
>>156073It's not a debate if the other side isn't arguing. If you're done, I'm done. I've said what I wanted to.>>156081>>156081THIS is why everyone my age gets a bad reputation. >>156083Correct, correct, correct aaaaaaand correct.>>156087I have seen that video. I understand what you're saying - I certainly respect the community's accomplishments. I respect the idea of anonymous and what has been done with it. But the community on a member-by-member basis? Not so much. It's hard to have respect for people who walk around spouting "ive been here since 2005 gtfo my /b/ newfag" and "omg nooo slayer sucks megadeth is so much better man" and "420 BLAZE IT FAGGOT".
>>155896It was not very mature of you to post that. This is not a silly green text arguments.
>>156071Yeah I know! That's why I said I like the rule as it is now. It's just annoying when underage people claim they can be here because a board is SFW.I don't know if the rule's not clear enough or if it's just kids being stupid
>>156083and cue the ironic shitposting. You sound just like those posters on /v/ that are thought to be underage.
>>156092That's the very basis of ageism. People discriminate against all types of groups illegitimately, whether that be age, weight, skin color, intelligence, nationality, or even dialect. Only the civilized and sophisticated abstain from illegitimate discrimination. I like the guy, too, by the way. I don't know if he is underage, but I don't care either way.
>>156100This. Most people really take for granted what excatly they post on the internet, and under anonymous no one could be to blame. But if you post it, you better be prepared for people to take you serious on the matter.
>>156104It's just people being stupid, the rules are perfectly clear.
>>156100if someone says they are 12 you think they should be banned ? Do you believe everything you see on an anonymous imageboard?
>>156102Being [>>156073], I didn't really argue with you about anything. Many others were, but not me -- I only suggested you give it a rest. It doesn't matter. Don't mind this post.
>>156092I don't hate someone because of their age.I also don't take seriously anything said by a 15 year old. Anything outside of "I need help, please call 911", that is.Just because I think kids should stick to kid friendly places doesn't mean I hate them.The 15 year old who walks into my favorite bar and orders a beer doesn't have the right to be there simply because he can grow some facial hair and get away with it. A beard does not a philosopher make.
>>156116Oh, sorry. I wasn't paying attention to your ID, I thought you were one of the people I was directly arguing with. My bad.>>156118>>156118>>156118>>156118Well spoken, reasonable, and generally a great statement.
>>156118You just said exactly what ageism is all about. Congratulations, your opinion is no more valid than any racist or nationalist extremist.
>>156101Well, yes, you are.Of course my generalization can't be correct--somewhere, someone will actually listen to a website's age limit. But the vast majority will not, to the point where arguing for age rules because you think it will change the userbase is flat-out retarded.
testings robotbox
>>156102haha you fucking retard. i was obviously joking, but your shallow 15 year old mind couldn't fathom that.get off 4chan and go on reddit or something
>>156114Actually, yes. If someone walked up to a cop and said, "I just killed a guy!" do you think he would not be handcuffed and processed?If you want to be here underaged, then so be it. The second you admit it, though, then fuck off.
to be honest i found this site when i was 13 im 16 now inb4 bani dont really see a problem with underage users since the website is all about being anonymous as long as the user isnt a huge fucking faggot then i think they are fine
>>156130>no sentence case>no commas>misuses the word 'fathom'Sure is underage in here.
>>156130Jesus christ!I actually wondered if I should state that I knew you were joking, but then I thought "No, it's so massively obvious that everyone will look at me and say 'no shit!' ".
Jesus, kid. Give it a rest already. Do us a favor: save this thread in its entirety, leave until you are in your 20's, and read the thread again. When you realize what a pretentious pseudo-intellectual cunt you were you will understand what we have been telling you ITT.
>>156142You know, I think I will.
>>156133that isnt a good analogy at all. Think about this website for a second. Then think about your post.
>>156125Wow ... just ... wow.Please go get arrested for buying liquor underage and scream discrimination and ageism all the way to the Supreme Court.I'll cheer you on. I'll laugh at how stupid you're being, but I'll still cheer you on.If you want to fight for a cause, go find a real one for which to fight. You have no clue what ageism really means.Let's reverse it. Go around and say you're 40. Watch all the people scream at you "lol u old gtfo internet pedo lol". I bet you won't see that as "ageism".
>>155882>I visited 4chan for the first time about a year and a half agoyes, you people need to lurk more and stop posting.
>>156148To be fair, admitting one's age is the only way someone would know, so it's obvious that's what people are banned for. And even if you're joking, that's just shitposting.
The amount of underage in this thread is disgusting. If I was a moderator, I would ban everyone who has admitted to their age.
>>156101>didn't come back until I was old enoughHahaha you little bitch
>>156160Good thing you aren't a moderator. The less moderators who are outright idiots, the better.
>>156160Mods don't read /q/. You know that.
>>156163>banning underage>outright idiocyOh the irony of that post. It stings.
>>156163Maybe I'd feel a little sorry for them, but rules are rules. You've got to uphold them.
>>156163Yeah, because moderators shouldn't ban people for violation of Global Rule 2.Idiot.
>>156157No, if someone actually provided proof then you would have proof. Like a picture with a timestamp.
>>156170>>156172Nothing wrong with moderators looking the other way unless an underage user is blatantly shitposting.>>156175You can't assume someone's age from a photo. The only way to know is if you say your age. If you admit to being underage ad get banned, toughed titties, what did you expect.
>>156149You're misrepresenting my statements. You explicitly stated that "[you] also don't take seriously anything said by a 15 year old." The very definition of ageism is "prejudice and discrimination against adolescents and children, including ignoring their ideas because they are too young, or assuming that they should behave in certain ways because of their age." More specifically, you are an adultist. And yes, that would be ageism, as well.I won't respond to any more of your posts because you're not worth my time. You're too fucking stupid to understand anything I say or even consider my words because you're too pretentious and stuck-up to even think of any deviation from your own delusional, obscene misperception of what constitutes a valid opinion.>>156160Only two people have admitted their age in this thread. Learn to read, cocksucker.
>>156172Global Rule 2 exists to placate people like yourself (idiots), and for no other reason. So no, they shouldn't.
>>156181Yes you can. Otherwise there would be no such thing as child porn.
>>156186its there to keep kids off of the site
>>156118>>156092>>156124Well it is in my opinion that I think we should encourage youth to grow up to be actual individuals with a logic/common sense, and to be a respectable person. I don't think we should insult them or bully them around simply for the fact they are below the age requirements of something. Though I think that point is clear enough. It seems though that age is both subjective when it comes to a a discussion and objective when it comes to laws because certain things that require you to be an 'adult' are different in other countries. The internet exists all over the world and so why is it that the US standard is dictated here? I mean I understand that the servers themselves are located here. Perhaps it's obvious and I'm not realizing it. Though I'd like to clarify something.. people are stupid and act ignorant. No matter their age there's always going to be someone fucking up. Let 'em learn or teach them why it's wrong I say. Some people need to stop acting as if the majority of people who act stupid are kids.
>>156175Again, you're asking for court of law level proof in a place that isn't a court of law.There is no 4chan "due process".>>156181There was a time on 4chan, particularly when Snacks was around, that someone admitting their age - regardless of the quality of their posts - would be instantly and publicly banned.Mods started looking the other way from time to time and that made all the other little teenagers think they had carte blanche.Have you ever read the little kid's book "If You Give a Mouse a Cookie"?Never give the mouse the cookie.
>>156188That's different, child porn is illegal. If someone posts a timestamp pic where they look like a ninth grader, you can't just assume they're in ninth grade and ban them.
>>156175Mods don't need proof to ban
>>156191This website has to obey US laws because it's an American website. I believe that's all there is to it.
>>156193Are you implying mice are bad people?
>>156186No, it's there to keep kids off the site and protect moot's liability when some buttmad parent sees their 14 year old browsing 4chan and tries to sue.Idiot.
HEY GUYS! what could POSSIBLY GO WRONG with letting a BUNCH OF KIDS on the site?
>>156199Just because it's illegal, the entirety of observational rules changes? By your logic, you can take some CP, but you can't assume the girl is 12 years old so it's fine?
>>156190>its there to keep kids off of the siteSpoiler: moot was 15 when 4chan was made
>>156184>waaaaa you just don't understand me! nobody gets me! waaaaaahhh!You are so clearly 15.GTFO. Reported.
>>156193There is freedom of speech besides a few things on 4chan. There is no rule against saying you killed someone or saying you are 12 . The rule is against being underage.
>>156190Thank you for contributing another grade school-level post to the thread, again furthering the point that (if you aren't under 18 yourself) over-18s post just as badly as do under-18s.>>156210>lettingOh, wow, he really thinks that rule stops more than 1% of underage users from browsing.>>156208The rule was removed because moot knew it was dumb and didn't stop anyone with intention to browse from browsing. That is the same reason mods "look the other way." It was readded because a group of idiots threw a hissy fit immediately afterward.>>156216>GTFO>in a thread saying underage posters shouldn't be allowed because of poor post qualityMy sides!
>>156191>I think we should encourage youth to grow up to be actual individuals with a logic/common sense,I think their parents should do that. I am not these people's Mama or their babysitter. They need to fuck off.
>>156216Announcing you reported posts is against the rules.
>>156186No, it's because it's illegal for children to view websites that allow pornography.
>>156212>Just because it's illegal, the entirety of observational rules changes? Yes, absolutely. CP can get the whole site shut down.
As many people have said in this thread, I agree that the ones who are mature enough to contribute to the site can if they do wish.But those stupid enough to post their ages, information, or get banned deserve what they get.
>>156213exceptions are not the rule. for every kid that might be able to post fine anonymously, you'll get 50 shitty kids that dont know jack shit about anything
>>156228Do you mind linking a relevant law? What you say could be true, but I was under the impression that only goes for the webpages themselves.I've never seen another chan that stated over-18 was necessary globally.
>>156223>There is freedom of speechReally? Instaban URLs, text, and certain word filters prove you wrong.4chan is not a democracy. 4chan is moot's website and what he says goes. Period.
>>156237>for every kid that might be able to post fine anonymously, you'll get 50 shitty kidsAccurate statistics I'm sure.
>>156233You don't understand what he's asking. >picture of 12 year old>"You don't know their 12, it's impossible to tell">Picture of 12 year old doing porn>"You don't know that's CP! It's impossible to tell their age"
I don't approve of underage users on principle. Yeah, they're going to come no matter what we do, but no reason we should encourage them to do so.Besides, with all the porn and other seedy shit that gets discussed even on the work safe boards it'd be a huge problem to be openly inviting children into those discussions.
>>156239And moot said the underage rule was outdated, unenforcable, and should be removed!Are you going to make me link to the archived thread, or will you just give up now?
>>156224>The rule was removedGlobal Rule 2 was NOT removed. Go see for yourself.
>>156239>4chan is not a democracy. 4chan is moot's website and what he says goes. Period.Moot talked about allowing under-18 on SFW boards and was convinced not to by /q/ posters.
>>156241That should be how it works theoretically, I guess, but people get really angry when you involve children. Though, it's much easier to tell when someone's 12 as opposed to 17.
>>156238http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_Internet_pornographyLegally, sites have no obligation to inform the viewer that you have to be over 18 to view this content, but that is the law and most sites do do that.
>>156241What you're suggesting is banning posters on /b/ and /soc/ who "look young I guess". That's retarded.
If they're not shiposting I guess it's okay.Remember, it's not age, but it's maturity of someone we can rely.
It's made me cynical, paranoid, and desensitized.Thanks, 4chan.
>>156248I'm gonna need a citation on that. Prove it.When moot changes the rules, the Rules page changes. It has not changed.It still says: "If you are under the age of 18, or it is illegal for you to view the materials contained on this website, discontinue browsing immediately."Pretty damn clear.
>>156250Well, here's moot's thoughts on it at least.http://archive.foolz.us/q/search/text/underage/capcode/admin/order/desc/
>>156246"Not prohibiting" isn't the same thing as "openly inviting." In this case, so many underage users browse that nothing would change.>>156250Did you really manage to miss the part a sentence later, "it was readded because..."? You are dense.>>156255Let me read through that. I can tell you, though...if all the law says is illegality for viewing the content, and not the website, then 4chan as a whole is legally free for any age, just not the porn boards.
>>156248Just because it's unenforceable doesn't mean it should be removed. If anything else it gives underage users the impression that they should at least try to conduct themselves like adults, which is hardly a bad thing.
>>155006Long and short of it is that people really are clueless morons for a good portion of their youth. They will think otherwise and disagree, thinking they are brilliant, misunderstood, old souls who are too good for their juvenile peers, but those are all thoughts of immature dipshits.Ideally, you'd expect a person to level out by 18, but some people continue being idiotic and childlike well into their 20's. That's not a stab at liking cartoons or toys, mind, but more a judgement on the way that many people still act like grade school stereotypes well into adulthood.At any rate, 18 is a good benchmark to ensure a bare minimum amount of maturity. If they insist on posting any ways, all I can ask is that our younger users don't go out of their way to insist on their involvement or participation in the site.
>>156259But in practical terms, unless the participant can actually be identified, that's basically the only way the law against CP could be effectively enforced here - you think the mods have time to do research into every problem image posted here? Much safer to delete it by default if it looks suspicious.
>>156267>http://archive.foolz.us/q/search/text/underage/capcode/admin/order/desc/"So essentially nothing changed in terms of the rule and our enforcement of it. "Hence, the rule did not change. Just means the mods probably won't enforce it.A cop looking the other way doesn't mean your actions are legal, it just means he has better things to do.
>>1562405 or 50 does not matter. not one inch.
>>156268Changing our stance from banning underage users on sight to indifference could hardly be seen as anything but an open invitation.
>>156275>Hence, the rule did not change. Just means the mods probably won't enforce it.This undermines your "Give a Mouse a Cookie" post.
>>156267Thank you, kind anon.>>156266That's the citation right there. Moot says...>I think it's a dumb and outdated rule>That said, banning users for simply stating their age is a huge waste of our time relative to other issue>Banning underage users for slipping their age in a thread is a huge fucking waste of time!>If you think the rule change will increase the number of <18 users browsing the site, you are nuts.>You people are idiots to think this changes anything. 50% of 4chan started browsing 4chan underage.>>156275Exactly. And a rule not enforced by the fucking people who wrote it should not be enforced by the users.Also, see all the stuff above, for moot's OPINION on the rule, which you yourself said should be the absolute law.>>156269I guess so.
>>156272Not all youth are "clueless morons," though. Some of them legitimately are intelligent and mature, especially in comparison to their age bracket.
>>156274>But in practical terms, unless the participant can actually be identified, that's basically the only way the law against CP could be effectively enforced hereOr you can delete pics that are clearly CP. Idiot.
>>156276http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone's_formulation
>>156288Unfortunately, most people are not qualified to judge themselves on such matters.Just because you are more mature and less dumb than your peers doesn't necessarily make you "legitimately intelligent."
>>156299Indeed, the age-old "biggest fish in the smallest pond" concept.
>>156299Others are, such as teachers, psychologists, mentors, parents, coaches, and the like.
The 18+ rule is comparable to the ratio requirements on torrent trackers.They usually won't enforce it to the letter, but if you start abusing the leeway, they'll ban you. The community rightfully shits on any underage/leechers they encounter, hopefully convincing them to fix themselves.It might seem outdated, but it's a necessary evil.
>>156282Seriously? Let me walk you through how dumb that is. For what you just said to apply, a person would have to:1. be underage2. know the rule that bans underage users3. adhere to the that rule, and neither browse nor post4. find out about the rule change5. come and postNo one under the age of 18 out there is waiting with bated breath for Global 2 to change. Anyone who wants to post on 4chan that much is already posting on 4chan. And for new users who show up, then of course it's not a fucking invitation, because they won't know there was ever a change in the first place.Seriously. What you said is simply not correct.
>>156303Leeching is actually selfish and bad though. Seeding directly benefits the quality of a tracker, age requirements don't directly benefit the quality of a website.
>>156287See, here's the problem.In the case of criminal and civil liability involving minors, United States law supersedes moot's opinion.He absolutely MUST have Global Rule 2 in place because there is pornography allowed on this website, even if he thinks it is a stupid law, he MUST abide by it.That's how it works in the grown up world.All it takes is for one of the underage kiddies parents to get buttmad when they see Loli Futa porn on their 13 year old's laptop and find out where they got it and get all of 4chan shut down because of it.Even if that 13 year old was the best poster in the whole history of 4chan, does the risk of his mommy suing moot and getting us ALL banned when he's forced to pull the plug make it worth it?I say no. Underaged kiddies need to stay the fuck off 4chan.
>>156307Considering how overseeded most private trackers are, I'd say age requirements benefit us at least as much as their ratio requirements do.
>>156314There's no such thing as overseeding.
>>156307Oh, but according to the people in this thread, they do.Despite the fact that, you know, 99% of underage posters who read Global 2 keep right on posting on anyway, these people are convinced that there is some kind of ravenous horde of minors out there just waiting for their chance to shit up 4chan.
>>156290I'm the idiot now? I said it's safest to delete by default if it looks suspicious, that obviously includes cases where it's clearly CP. The point was that it's still a guess based only on doing a cursory visual evaluation of the image. Sure, in obvious cases it's an almost certainly correct guess, but it's still not confirmed.
>>156313>He absolutely MUST have Global Rule 2 in place because there is pornography allowed on this website, even if he thinks it is a stupid law, he MUST abide by it.He doesn't have to be a dick about it, though, and he isn't one. US laws against minors viewing pornography aren't taken nearly as seriously as Child Porn laws.
>>156315What if there is so much seeding, so much that there are no more leechers and everyone is a seeder, making the concept of seeding obsolete and nonexistent?
Moot was a kid when he made 4chan. I imagine since he was mature enough to found the damn site he would understand some underageb& are mature enough to act like adults.
>>156317It only includes cases where it's CP. You're not going to go around deleting pictures of people who look like they're 14, that's just fucking retarded.
>>156313I never said the rule should be removed. Legally, if the rule has to be there, then it should be there.The fact that it is not enforced by the staff CLEARLY indicates that they have no worries about the situation you just described. And you know what? If moot and the mods aren't worried about "one of the underage kiddies parents getting buttmad," then you and everyone should also not worry about it.So there goes your "we must drive underage posters away to protect 4chan (even though the mods don't)" argument. The "underage posters decrease site quality" argument also holds no water. So what excuses do you have left for trying to keep out under-18s?
>>156320I guarantee you he will become a dick about it the very first time someone's parent drags him into court for the things found on a minor's computer.It will happen. It's just a matter of time and it will change 4chan forever. Then everyone's going to be mad at moot for not enforcing GR2 with the force of 1000 suns.
I read through about half of this thread.lowering the age limit would be a very bad thing. I do not want a 15 year old kid coming here and openly be able to talk about how it feels bad that he has to start drivers ed next week. Or how he cant find a date for the 8th grade formal, or how his parents just dont "understand him" etc.It is much much much MUCH better when they have to PRETEND that they are 18 and older. Thats the whole fucking point. That's what we are trying to say. The kid in here who is trying to throw out "omg ageism" just doesn't seem to get that.I'm sorry, but there are some parts of that should be for adults and adults only. To the 2QPw guy, stop trying to butt your way in here, quit fucking whining, and go back to PRETENDING like you are an adult. I'm not going to report you or anything, but you have to understand that the 18 rule is for quality control.
>>156324What ever you say, Syndrome.
>>155088>underage people seem to think that because a board is blue and wasn't listed on the front page under 18+,Frequenting the boards I do I do not see this as at all true.
>>156337>I guarantee you he will become a dick about it the very first time someone's parent drags him into court for the things found on a minor's computer.Which is never.
>>156332Mods also don't really enforce the No Ponies rules, but that's not going to stop me from throwing rocks at them.Same goes for anyone who claims to be underage. The rocks will fly.Same goes for anyone who says they're a chick. "Tits or GTFO" is the only response they get.Deal with it, or leave. Hobson's Choice.
>>156339Oh, sure, it's much better to have some 19 year-old come here and talk about how he can't get a girlfriend--at his university, of course. 110% different form that fucking underage b& kid and the prom shit.
I feel the same way about underage user as I do about female users: As long as you don't go around making a big deal about it, I don't care.
>>156339>lowering the age limit would be a very bad thing. I do not want a 15 year old kid coming here and openly be able to talk about how it feels bad that he has to start drivers ed next week. Or how he cant find a date for the 8th grade formal, or how his parents just dont "understand him" etc.The only boards this would be relavant for is /adv/, and that sounds a lot more tolerable than threads where people ask how to rape their girlfriend.
I'm under aged.My board never had any problems with my "maturity".Never really get called out for shitposting when posting normally either.My opinion on the matter is a mix between: >>156359 and >>155040
>>155145That is actually a serious legal problem. I really had no idea that happens.>>155125This. >it's unlikely that this site will damage you in any way.That could be argued.
>>156357>Mods also don't really enforce the No Ponies rulesNo, they do.>but that's not going to stop me from throwing rocks at themYou sound like a "ban things I don't like" shitposter, who unfortunately dominate most of the discussions on /q/.
>>156339>lowering the age limit would be a very bad thing. I do not want a 15 year old kid coming here and openly be able to talk about how it feels bad that he has to start drivers ed next week. Or how he cant find a date for the 8th grade formal, or how his parents just dont "understand him" etc.This exact thing happens with adults already.But yes. Very bad idea.
>>156363>that sounds a lot more tolerable than threads where people ask how to rape their girlfriend.Really? Hm...
>>156357One assumes you hate the bronies because they decrease board quality, right? "Underage posters" as whole, however, cannot be said to do that. It's not even a matter of subjectivity, it's a matter of not being able to fucking identify them.I've seen many posts in this thread on the "anti-underage" side that read like something straight out of sixth grade. They look like fucking text messages. And, as implied by their stance, they are all over the age of 18. And their posts are absolute shit, and look exactly like the "underage" stereotype.You will never be able to say (and be correct) that people who are underage post worse than those who aren't. And therefore, you will never have any basis for trying to get them off the site.Also,>implying I'm a minor
I report everyone who admits they're underage~
>>156354>Which is never.And you know this ...... how?This is the United States, son. We're the most litigious society in the history of the world. We sue left and right over a lot of things.Parents can, and have, shut down sites that allow underage users to see porn. The liability is made worse by moot admitting to know that underage people come here and doesn't care.See, even moot can be an idiot sometimes, and it will come back to haunt him. He seriously needs to have a lawyer on staff.
>>156339No one is asking for the age limit to be lowered. Read the original post again. I'm just asking for moot's opinion. And again, you are stereotyping adolescents, a form of ageism. And yes, I'm "throwing [it] out" because it applies when I do. If you know what the term actually means, you'd realize this. Additionally, what makes me a "kid"? I'm stating my opinion and just because I am defending underage users, that doesn't mean I am one myself. What YOU have to understand is that I'm not trying to "butt [my] way in here," seeing how I'm the OP and I've obviously been here since the beginning of the thread. And like I said, I NEVER ASKED FOR THE RULES TO CHANGE. For fuck's sake, it's like no one even reads the damn thread.
>>156380>This is the United States, son. We're the most litigious society in the history of the world. We sue left and right over a lot of things.A lot of lawsuits that people think are stupid actually weren't, like the McDonalds coffee lawsuit. McDonald's got in trouble for heating their coffee to dangerous temperatures to hide the bad taste, a lot hotter than normal coffee is heated at. No one's going to sue 4chan and it's not going to go to court if they do, unless it's about piracy or CP.
>>156380You just keep repeating the same things. You're still insisting you know better than moot and his staff? They don't care, ergo it's not a concern.This is a website where child porn is posted with disgusting frequency, yet it lives to see another day. Trust me, moot is completely aware of what he must do to stay in the legal clear.
>>156357Tits or GTFO only applies on /b/.
>>156389Those two things are things that happen on 4chan a lot.
>>156385>Additionally, what makes me a "kid"? I'm stating my opinion and just because I am defending underage usersSame thing happens in every thread on /q/."I don't think tripfags should be banned" -> lol you're a tripfag"I don't think ponies should be banned" -> lol you're a ponyfag"I don't think naruto should be banned" -> lol you're a narutard/q/ was a dumb idea, 4chan's userbase isn't mature enough for a meta board.
>>156389>A lot of lawsuits that people think are stupid actually weren't, like the McDonalds coffee lawsuitAnd a lot of lawsuits that people think are stupid actually are, like that one case where this guy was sued for passing gas in a store near someone else. I don't think anecdotes are really helpful as evidence here.
>>156403I'd say that /q/ is infinitely better than having scattered metathreads on the individual boards.
>>156401Right, that's why I said unless a lawsuit was about those things.
>>156400Yeah, femanon attention whoring is frowned upon everywhere, but if you post tits or GTFO then you're a fucking shitposter.
>>156409Well in the case of the later it would be much more serious than a lawsuit.
I'd like to say, I read the wiki article anon posted.The only illegality is knowingly providing minors with access to porn. The laws says nothing about websites, web pages, or otherwise. Therefore, 4chan as a whole need not be stated as 18+, only the boards where porn is allowed.To maybe finally shut up the idiot who keeps going on about under-18s being a danger to the site's legal survival.
>>156417>The only illegality is knowingly providing minors with access to porn.And moot, by his own admission, is doing that.Oops.
>>156425>And moot, by his own admission, is doing that.No he isn't.
>>156417Porn is posted on every board. Your argument is invalid.
>>156429And if you want to argue that Moot has no controll over this, you're making it possible to arrest anons for posting porn on blue boards because they could be providing it to minors.
>>156429Porn gets deleted (lol) on SFW boards.
>>156425Nope. Maybe you should go read the laws themselves before trying to one-up me, because I read them and right now you're just making a fool of yourself.4chan is a website where porn is available, but access need only be restricted in specific areas where there the porn is meant to be.Go visit a porn site. Any random porn site.The first page that opens tells you that you must be over the age of 18 to legaly view the website.But wait, shit! You're already on the website! Doesn't that mean that you could prosecuted?No. Because the website didn't provide you with porn yet.>>156429You can't be this stupid. Porn can be posted on any fucking website BY USERS and it won't raise legal issues. It only matters what the website itself ALLOWS or itself DISPLAYS. 4chan itself does not allow or post porn on SWF boards, making them legally clear for all ages.>>156437It's not about moot's control, it's about moot's allowances. The law will only look at the intentions of the-->>156443This. If moot and his website actively regulate the content and ensure it stays in designated 18+ areas, they can let people of any age run all over the rest of the website.Christ, read the laws yourselves.
>>156446>You can't be this stupid. Porn can be posted on any fucking website BY USERS and it won't raise legal issues. It only matters what the website itself ALLOWS or itself DISPLAYS. 4chan itself does not allow or post porn on SWF boards, making them legally clear for all ages.Technically, the J-List ads might be a liability if moot allowed underage users on SFW boards, even though they don't display nudity.
>>156358Where did I say that tfw no gf threads are a good idea? They need to be fucking banished.All I'm saying is in my opinion, is that the 18 rule is one of the few quality control rules that 4chan has.>>156385>No one is asking for the age limit to be lowered. Read the original post again. I'm just asking for moot's opinion.Fair enough>And again, you are stereotyping adolescents, a form of ageism. And yes, I'm "throwing [it] out" because it applies when I do. If you know what the term actually means, you'd realize this.I was not stereotyping adolescents. I feel as if 4chan is at it's best when people have to pretend that they are an adult. Make no mistake about, I fucking know that there are underage users here, especially in /v/ and /b/.> Additionally, what makes me a "kid"? I'm stating my opinion and just because I am defending underage users, that doesn't mean I am one myself.I read your post wrong. It was another anon who said "WELL WHAT IF I WAS 16". Thought that was you, and I consider anyone under 18 a kid.Also, If you aren't against Global Rule 2, then why did you make a thread and subsequent posts defending underage users? Explain this to me.
>>156446You're the stupid one. Minors should not be allowed here for a multitude of reasons.
>>156453Could be. I don't know how non-explicit materials are governed.>>156460Well, as I've been arguing for the majority of this thread, all those reasons you think exist are really nonsense. Name one, and we'll continue the argument from there...since you seem to want to abandon the porn legality issue.
>>156464Those reasons are not nonsense you dimwit. You're the one wanting to pretend porn will never not be a thing on many boards.
>>156457>All I'm saying is in my opinion, is that the 18 rule is one of the few quality control rules that 4chan has.It doesn't DO anything. It's just to cover his bases, even moot himself admitted this. He doesn't consider it quality control.
>>156467Once again, it doesn't matter whether it's a "thing," it matters whether the website allows it. And...it doesn't.So, this is still the "porn + underage users = legal problems for 4chan" argument, right? Tiresome.
>>156467>Those reasons are not nonsense you dimwit. You're the one wanting to pretend porn will never not be a thing on many boards.That's not what he said, did you ignore his post or are you simply retarded?
>>156457You explicitly stated:> I do not want a 15 year old kid coming here and openly be able to talk about how it feels bad that he has to start drivers ed next week. Or how he cant find a date for the 8th grade formal, or how his parents just dont "understand him" etc.Perhaps I'm reading too much into it and seeing insinuations that aren't there and if so, I apologize. That sounds like stereotyping, though, if only to a degree. I did posit the hypothetical scenario of if I were 16-years old, whether that would change the other individual's opinion of me based solely on that. I was using it as simply a scenario, though. That doesn't mean I actually am 16.I'm against GR2 ethically, but not legally. I believe it would be safe to keep the rule up, though, I think people shouldn't take it as seriously as many seem to, especially in regards to condemning all underage users without giving them a chance to defend their side or even give something to judge them by. GR2 serves little purpose outside of legal safeguarding, though your point of it promoting quality content has some validity to it. That sounds like you're saying minors don't post quality content, though, or that adults usually do.
>>156474If porn is not allowed and you allow minors to come here and an anon decides he's going to post porn HE CAN BE ARRESTED or face legal repercussions. You are making it so that anons can be arrested.
>>156485>If porn is not allowed and you allow minors to come here and an anon decides he's going to post porn HE CAN BE ARRESTEDlol no he can't
>>156457You were posting examples (prom, drivers' ed) that imply underage users have life experiences that are so much more horrible to read than about than over-18s, and/or that they will post about their life experiences in a worse way than over-18s. Both are not true; shitposters are shitposters and everybody has awful dreck in their lives to shit up 4chan with.>>156485No, he couldn't. He could be jailed, though, if he fought a long and hard legal battle to get himself jailed!
So, was moot breaking the law by creating 4Chan? I mean, he was underage and running effectively a porn site.
>>156506Hurr.mute for unoriginal comment etc.
>>156506I really want to know the answer to this. It has been eating me.
>>156511notsureifserious.jpg
I'm fine with them especially if they're like me and learning how to be mature. I know we don't think of 4chan as a mature place in the slightest, but I grew up on 4chan and learn a lot about how to be mature, and 4chan actually taught me about several annoying character traits, like being edgy.
>>156428Moot knows minors are here.Moot doesn't care to enforce the 18+ rule.Moot knows porn is posted here.Moot knowingly provides porn to minors.That's how the law will see it. All it takes is one person reporting it to the right agency and 4chan is changed forever.All because of one 14 year old.Frankly, I can't wait for it to happen. It'll be glorious. The amount of drama and buttmad over 4chan being gone will be entertaining for a long time.Way more so than when the original Encyclopedia Dramatica became Oh Internet.
>>156530>That's how the law will see it. All it takes is one person reporting it to the right agency and 4chan is changed forever.Why don't you go do that, then.implied sage for feeding the troll
IMO, there should be a report option that states "Author is under 18" and if it is flagged enough, it can be given a brief scan to see if the content states so, and then ban them accordingly
>>156530There was a 13 year old who killed himself because of /b/ trolling him back in 2003. If anything it brought MORE minors in
>>156550>2003>/b/Uh huh.>>156542>Why don't you go do that, then.I don't want to. But someone eventually will.There are 7 billion people on this planet. Do you honestly think all 7 billion of them will simply respect 4chan? HA!
There is no such thing as immaturity or maturity they are both just ways for people to say that they're better than one another because they have forgotten how to laugh at at a fart joke or forgotten how it was to be a child. Just because you don't think a fart joke is funny doesn't mean you are any better than anyone. The people who you guys are calling "immature" aren't immature they're just stupid because if you're not using that word in the means of ranking somebody then the word you're looking for isn't immaturity it's stupidity
>>156586Uh... People can be immature.
>>156575He's probably thinking of LUE.http://www.wikifaqs.net/index.php?title=SteriLUEzation&oldid=29276
>>156589Not immature but stupid
>>156586http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maturity_(psychological)
>>156608If you think it would be funny to run around with your shirt off in a funeral you're not immature you're stupid like I said some people just use the word to rank others below them but you're not better than someone just because you don't think a fart joke is funny and they do
I think openly allowing minors to 4chan would be a terrible idea.Right now, underage users are forced to act like adults to avoid being called out by various others.If we were to lift that rule, suddenly, its alright for immature posting to exist. Sure, to some degree it already exists, but for the people against that sort of posting, that at least have "The Law of 4chan" on their side. Without this "Law" I believe that it will polarize the two sides even further, to the point where we might have "Users against the Underage" and "Users for the Underage".It would be like ponies on /co/ but site-wide.That is my prediction.
>>156651Right, because the majority of anons act like adults.
>>156651Right. It would turn into new reddit.
The problem with the rules stating that being a minor is fine is that it also essentially says it's fine if you act like one too. We don't need 13 year old faggots shitting up the whole site with their garbage from callofdutyfans.net forums or shit like that.This was pointed out in another thread a while ago on the same topic that moot actually responded to. I don't know if somebody else already pointed it out in this thread as well, but there you go.
>>155072I don't think you've seen enough shit to be properly confident in saying that.
Hopefully, this thread stays up the night. Going to bed. Keep this bumped in hopes that moot responds!G'night.
>>156752It won't stay up. Moot won't respond.
Underage faggots can shut the fuck up or get the fuck out.
>this threadSo cool and edgy. And you dare to think nobody can see you're underage.
>>156651Is it even a rule that minors aren't allowed? I always thought it was just due to US law and all the NSFW content that ends up on EVERY board
>>157471Global rule #2:>If you are under the age of 18, or it is illegal for you to view the materials contained on this website, discontinue browsing immediately.moot revoked it for a few hours in the early days of /q/ but was convinced to revert it.http://archive.foolz.us/q/thread/12471/#14873http://archive.foolz.us/q/thread/34038/
Still? Jesus fuckballs, man. Shouldn't you kiddies be in school?Go to fucking school!
>>155145mfw this uppity homosex thinks anyone that isnt a bear and over 30 is underage and anyone who finds them attractive is a pedofile.
>>156772>>157290>>157357>>157471>>157515>>157545>>157546Thanks for keeping the thread alive, whether you meant to or not.So moot, you gonna respond?
>>157550There is no reason for moot to respond. It just opens him up for legal issues if he agrees and changes nothing. /q/ isn't really a Moot AMA
>>157558Actually there are no legal issues. But the true reason to why moot keeps this rule is simple. To keep retards off from 4chan.
>>157560>no issues>wotno legal issues with knowingly allowing minors to view adult content?I can only assume this is a troll because no rule is keeping anyone off 4chan
>>157558What are you talking about? The "/q/ - 4chan Discussion" board certain is a Q&A/AMA when pertaining to moot. This is evident by the replies he gets whenever he posts. I'm just posting a question I hope he can answer and no, it won't open up to any legal inquiries or issues, considering how I'm asking for his PERSONAL opinion on the matter. Just because the may not agree with the laws, that doesn't mean he won't follow them. If anything, the fact that he's respecting federal law despite his own views shows more of him than if he agreed with the laws being implemented. moot started 4chan when he was 15, so his opinion on underage users should be paramount.>>157562Of course moot knows he's providing adult content to minors, as do any porn site on the Internet. He respects the legal aspects of the issue, though, by putting up a warning for all minors and discouraging browsing by underage users. You can express criticism and discontent for a law while still following it, ya know. If that wasn't true, then why aren't people who say they hate the government be investigated for treason or terrorist threats?
If I see someone admitting to being underage I will report them, they deserve to be banned. Otherwise, whatever.
>>157619That appears to be the general consensus, so far.
>>155145>Those under 18 are allowed on various parts of 4chan, just not in the adult content areas where nudity is posted.Incorrect.Global Rule 2:If you are under the age of 18, or it is illegal for you to view the materials contained on this website, discontinue browsing immediately.http://www.4chan.org/rules
People under 18 are objectively retarded.It's proven in several studies, your brain isn't fully developed until you're about 21.And kids only bring shit with them, anyway, just look at all the sudden Skyrim and CoD love on /v/, I even saw a freaking nostalgia thread for Halo.I say purge the kids, get them out before they corrupt us all.
>>157694Oh come on.Not all of us are that bad, I mean for example some of us have enough sense to not go to /v/
>>157694>objectively retarded>brain isn't fully developedHoly shit, you think those are the same thing? I guess you've been on 4chan so long you've forgotten the actual definition of mental retardation.Anyway, you are once again an example of an over-18 making a total fool out of himself by his posts.
>>1576941. You don't know what "objectively" means.2. You're "objectively retarded" for your statements because they are absolutely false.3. The brain isn't fully developed until age 25, but that doesn't mean maturity or intelligence can't exist before then.4. ????5. Shut up.Go be an ageist shittroll somewhere else.
Are we all forgetting about Jared Milton?
>>157882Who is Jared Milton?
>>15791115(?)-year old who posted faggy Youtube videos of him singing and being trollb8, attracting the attention of millions and millions of /b/tards all collectively bleating "faggot". Then again he was pretty smart, because he ran ads against his videos and every view made him money. Conspiracy, I say.
>>157937How is that relevant to this discussion?
>>157955Absolutely no idea; I didn't mention him the first time.
>>157962Well thanks for the information anyway.What's your opinion on underage users on 4chan?
>>157694>nostalgia thread for HaloAll my lols. Every damn one of them.
>>157966In all likelihood they make up a majority of the userbase. I can't usually discern whether or not a poster is underage anyway.From what I can tell there's no negative effects to an adolescent if he regularly browses 4chan, and if anything it desensitizes them to most of the bullshit they're going to have to deal with in later life - something modern Western society doesn't make a point of doing.
>>157980I agree. Desensitization can actually be beneficial to an extent. Only at the point in which the individual no longer feels emotions toward issues that should evoke feelings is when it has gone too far.
>>157545>School never ends
>>157560Not sure if serious.
>>157694Nostalgia can be about something that happened just a few years ago. You see people getting nostalgic about how good 4chan was in the beginning.It's also clear you don't know what you're talking about.
>>158004>Check post timeThe kiddies should have been in school learning and doin' math and shit, not arguing for their right to be on 4chan.
>>158018The adults have been doing the same thing as well.
>>158008I forgot to specify that moot would only obviously allow minors access to SFW boards. If there is porn posted, it's the poster's fault. Not his fault. Same for CP. But that rule is keeping a lot of retards away. So I'm still against letting minors to SFW boards.
>>158025Minors should be let of SFW boards or any. There is no reason to allow this. They come here anyway and allowing it would only bring more undesirables who use other forms of social media such as reddit. Allowing that would also cause a split in 4chan. You would have to have a site for kid friendliness, and one for adults. This will not and should happen.
>>158036should not*
>>158072No. You're doing is so fucking wrong. You don't say /b/ has made you a better person. You could have said just 4chan and you would have been 30% more credible.
>>158095At least he was honest (allegedly).
>>158072Give or take a few months and you'll begin to realize how terrible it is and go to other boards.
>>158072>I started at 12 years old and am now 14.>I was 14 in 2005>Someone is now 14 in 2012>I'm 21 and realizing I'm getting old
>>>/v/153733675>Memes>Email>Smileys>Constant swearingThis is why I don't like underaged people on 4chan
>>158118You rarely see that outside of /v/. I don't browse /v/, but from that and the torrents of "fix /v/ plox" threads I see here, that board needs a serious damn enema.
Most underage kids will just shit this place up further. I know there are some young users that are OK for the site, but seriously moot, don't follow through.
>>156403>4chan's userbase isn't mature enough for a meta board.By that logic, Reddit shouldnt have /r/circlebroke as a reddit bashing meta board because the overwhelming majority of Reddit users are obnoxious hipster pseudointellectual neckbeards seeking positive affirmation for being le brave atheist engineering majors who also played video games in the 90's. Perhaps the only redeeming value of Reddit, is that communities such as /r/circlebroke exist to bash reddit and raise awareness of shit your average newfag redditor does but really isn't bothered by yet. Reddit has visible mods who do nothing and even participate in circlejerking - 4chan has invisible janitors who are agnostic and "moot" whos appearance is a special event. 4chan lacks an effective community content control system that in the right hands (as in a group of self aware MATURE users) could do away with much of the shit that clogs the boards. The way 4chan cycles threads with every bump means circlejerks continue and shitposts get replies because there is nothing new to reply to. Users don't want to search 15 pages for the thread they are looking for, so they make a new one - hence the endless circlejerks. This endless cycle is just as bad as a hivemind of redditors upvoting the same damn content each and every day.
>>158118You would have hated 4chan 6 years ago.
>>158157I've spent almost 7 years on /v/ now, I'm simply unable to leave this hellhole.
>>158118Only thing I see here is a vidya thread ruined by autism.
>>158163>tfw no qt gf
>>158172It actually hurts to read shit like that.
>>158163Then you should be used to the use of emoticons, memes and constant swearing.Email, not so much. But I'm pretty sure that Uncel Dolan's email address is a fake.It's not hard to leave /v/ either. I haven't been there since 2008. Well, I've probably spent about 5 hours there in total since then. Such a shitty board.
I think it's simply a "don't ask, don't tell" thing. There is no fucking reason to ever officially or inofficially allow7accept underage here and if you admit that you're underage you need to get banned and leave the site. However there is no point in assuming that anyone here is actually underage as long as they don't blatantly show it. If you're underage but you still lurked enough and post at least somewhat intelligent content then there's no reason for you to stop posting, after all there's no evidence that you're underage in the first place.Sadly with people being 14 and whatnot it's most likely they will act like obnoxious retards and then they need to fuck off. These people are the whole reason you're only allowed to post with over 18 years of age here in the first place. Underage is not necessarily being dumb, but most of the time it leads to them posting retarded shit. You can't assume that everyone is going to be like moot with 15 years, so of course there need to be generalizations. If you're "smart" enough you won't show that you're underage.
Usually no one can tell unless they come right out and say it (or post on /soc/ and look underage). Therefore, no, underaged users are not at all a problem. Though I think most should stay on /b/ until the age of 16 or late 15.I have been bettered by this site's various boards such as /fa/, /mu/, /ic/, /sci/, /lit/, /pol/, and even /tv/ a little bit. They all made me a better and more knowledgeable and cultured person and I'm glad I've had them as a teenager to learn more about life's various facets before most people (if they ever do).
>>158273When you say "most" you don't really know what you're talking about. Some people think the majority of 4chan is underage. That's most likely untrue but you can't tell how many there are as you said.
>>158273>You can't assume that everyone is going to be like moot with 15 years, so of course there need to be generalizations.Perhaps, but those generalizations need to be accurate and should acknowledge the minorities and exceptions within them. I'm against illegitimate generalizations and discrimination, not legitimate ones.
>>157560>>158025You're wrong. Moot's talked about deleting global rule 2 and the only reason it's there is legal stuff. It has nothing to do with keeping retards off 4chan.
>>157694Liking Skyrim doesn't mean you're retarded. You can also be over 18 and still be nostalgic about Halo, I'm 20 and I was 9 when Halo came out.
Annoying as they are, there's been no 100% proven effective method to keep minors off certain sites.Until such time as one is invented, what would you suggest 4chan do?
>>158300>/pol/>making people smarter>nigga what? /pol/ is a hellhole of trolling with very little actual political discussion
>>158433And then you realize that /pol/ has the same mindset as politicians, just without the restraint
It's pretty simple for me. If I can't tell that someone is underage (indicated by shitposting and immaturity) then I am fine. Convince me that you are 18 with quality posts and there's no problem.When highschoolers turn boards like /v/ into a shit hole, that's when we have a big problem and those people should leave.Is that fair? It has less to do with age, and more to do with quality of posting (which sometimes may be a byproduct of age).
We've already been over this many times, OP.While we are aware many users are underage, this isn't the issue.While we are aware that people will always browse underage, this isn't the issue.The issue is quality of posts. If people are forced to conduct themselves as adults, then discussion focuses towards more mature topics. The community itself is also more mature, because people do not talk about their immature high school drama on the boards.In addition to that, as the disclaimer states, it's actually illegal for people who are under 18 to browse 4chan. If Moot were to make the boards open to under-18 year olds to post freely, he would be basically breaking the law himself. Why do you think every porn site in existence has a similar disclaimer?Moot did this once to troll, but he could get in trouble very easily for it.tl;dr age limits force people to behave more maturely and not bring their stupid bullshit into the boards. It's illegal to allow underage users knowingly.
>>158442I'd also like to mention that most underagefags are also newfags, and therefore do not contribute much to the discussion.Imagine, for a second, that underage users are allowed. Now it's perfectly acceptable to post if you're 14/15/16, and this sends the message to newfags that it's okay to just go ahead and post without lurking or learning a damn thing about the site.
>>158431I suggest we not condemn and hate minors so much, especially considering how those who'd actually use this site and withstand the vitriol and morbidity of it aren't anything like the majority of idiotic adolescents. We should condone minors using 4chan, not condemn it. If we must discourage it, then we should do so in an appropriate and less intolerant manner.
>>158155>By that logic, Reddit shouldnt have /r/circlebroke as a reddit bashing meta board because the overwhelming majority of Reddit users are obnoxiousThe circlejerk subreddits are different, since they're parody-meta, not serious-meta. /q/ is serious-meta, and invites mostly butthurt crybabies begging for things they don't like to be banned. /qs/ or /qb/ might be a good board (probably not, though).>Perhaps the only redeeming value of Reddit, is that communities such as /r/circlebroke exist to bash reddit and raise awareness of shit your average newfag redditor does but really isn't bothered by yet.That's true, it's a good feature of Reddit that they allow the creation of hundreds of different micro-communities. Not all of these communities will conform to the general stereotype of a redditor.>4chan lacks an effective community content control system that in the right hands (as in a group of self aware MATURE users) could do away with much of the shit that clogs the boards.No, that's an awful idea. The majority of 4chan users are retarded, and allowing the userbase of /v/ or /a/ to "self-moderate" will just result in them becoming even worse hiveminds than they are now.>>158442How does an age limit encourage quality posts? All it makes bannable is directly saying you're underage.
>Listing moot as an example of a smart 15 year old.Just because he is our god, doesn't make him smart.Also, if you're underage, and contribute well enough that nobody suspects you, then I suppose you deserve to stay on the site. Because fuck knows most of the 'adults' here don't contribute.
>>158446>Now it's perfectly acceptable to post if you're 14/15/16, and this sends the message to newfags that it's okay to just go ahead and post without lurking or learning a damn thing about the site.It's already fine to post without lurking, you leejun faggot.
>>158448>how does an age limit contribute to quality postsRead my posts again if you didn't get it the first time, because I was very clear.
>>158451>It's already fine to post without lurkingMaybe on /b/ or whatever shitty board you post on, but ideally we should be encouraging lurking and saging/ridiculing those who are obviously new. If you seriously don't think those who are new should lurk, then I can only assume you haven't been here long enough to understand what is creating problems with the site.
>>158454>>158442>The issue is quality of posts. If people are forced to conduct themselves as adults, then discussion focuses towards more mature topics. An age limit doesn't force people to conduct themselves like adults, all it does is force them to not say they're underage. It's symbolic and does literally nothing else.>>158454/b/ IS the "lurl moar meme xD" board.
>>158451Well I see his point that if there is an age limit of 18, there's somewhat of an incentive for underage users to at least ACT mature.
>>158442I'm fine with that and I don't oppose Global Rule #2 so much as I'm simply discontent with the emphasis the 4chan community places upon it. I initially made this thread to discuss the topic of underage users and hopefully read moot's opinion on the matter, not change any rules. If I were aiming for the latter, wouldn't I have stated so in my original post? And by the way, it's only illegal to officially condone minors on this site. For moot to personally condone or even support it, or to be aware that minors browse the content on this site is not illegal whatsoever.>>158446Newfags aren't an issue. The problem lies in shitposting and 4chan cancer, not new users. Eventually, most "newfags" either learn about the ways of this site or leave and don't come back, so there isn't much to discuss regarding that aspect of this site's community. Additionally, allowing underage users to use this site does not encourage shitposting per se, nor would it demean the idea of "lurk moar." The only foreseeable issues that allowing minors to browse can cause would be legal troubles, a possibility of content integrity and topic shift, and perhaps an influx of younger users. Other than that, I doubt the abolition of GR2 would do much else.
>>158460It doesn't force them to act mature, since you can only be banned if you admit to being under 18. "Acting like a kid" isn't bannable under global rule 2.
>>158466If you think newfags are a serious problem and "lurk moar" isn't shitposting, then you're probably underage yourself.
>>158457>An age limit doesn't force people to conduct themselves like adults, all it does is force them to not say they're underage. It's symbolic and does literally nothing else.No. Because of the age limit, users are hesitant to accept obviously underage posters who reveal themselves through any method. If someone on 4chan calls you underage, it is not a factual statement, it's an insult based on the quality of your post. Essentially, the 4chan userbase (somewhat correctly) correlates maturity and good posting with age.Basically, this community peer pressure makes people behave more maturely and not bring up their kiddie shit.>/b/ IS the "lurl moar meme xD" board.How about you check out /b/ and tell me if that's the case, because it's the shittiest board, with the most obviously underage population. Part of the reason it's shit is because that's where all the newfags go, and newfags don't know jack shit, so they all accept each other.
You guys act like anyone even obeys the rules.
>>158473>No. Because of the age limit, users are hesitant to accept obviously underage posters who reveal themselves through any method. The only way to reveal yourself as underage is by admitting to be underage. Mods don't ban for anything else.>Essentially, the 4chan userbase (somewhat correctly) correlates maturity and good posting with age.And that's laughably immature.>>158473>Part of the reason it's shit is because that's where all the newfags go, and newfags don't know jack shit, so they all accept each other.It's also the only board that still cares about newfags in the first place. Lurk moar and pretending to be an oldfag = shitposting.
>>158449I never said moot was a smart adolescent, though I do believe he was. I agree with the other stuff, though.>>158451It's not fine if the user is ignorant to the culture and community of 4chan.>>158457I think an age limit does apply some significant pressure for minors to post like adults in an attempt to not be found out, though that pressure is admittedly not very successful, especially when the adults on this site don't even post like adults.>>158471I said newfags AREN'T a serious problem. As for "lurk moar," it isn't shitposting so long as it is stated and encouraged appropriately as compared to being used as an insult or attack when someone fails to understand a certain 4chan-related topic or doesn't recognize certain "copypasta.">>158474Who's acted like that?
>>158471>If you think newfags are a serious problem>Newfags aren't an issueAnd it is flat out retarded to think that it is unnecessary to read a board for a little while before posting so you don't shit it up so much when you do. The fact that a lot of people don't feel the need to do this is a pretty major cause of 4chan's problems.
>>158460This and only this. Stop pretending it isn't. You see the difference between here and other places. You know what would happen if any kid were welcome.
All of us, including moot was underage when we first got on 4chan. I'd say you need to be underage to have a healthy view of 4chan, since it's the only way you can actually take the culture and not shitposting to heart. It's ironic, underageb& take more time and effort into posts, because they're actually invested in posting conscientiously.
>>158470I think for some it might. I lurked for a good year because I was terrified of posting. The community is so hostile I was afraid of being torn to shreds for being new. Maybe other 4Chan users aren't as self-conscious, but I think an age limit goes some way in scaring under-age users into contributing maturely, at the risk of being outed. Especially in a community that is made up of a userbase that thrives on the approval of others.
>>158471>newfags aren't a problemRemember when you could talk about Japanese games on /v/?Yeah. That was before normalfags came in and "WAAH WAAH WEEABOO STUFF IS GAY I WANT TO TALK ABOUT WAR GAMES" happened. Do you somehow think people just change and become shitposters?
>>158484/v/ is awful but i've been in enough japanese game threads to know you're being hyperbolic right now
>>158478>I think an age limit does apply some significant pressure for minors to post like adults in an attempt to not be found outI don't think so, because it's a joke rule.>>158479Newfags aren't an issue. Redditors and tumblrdrones are, but these people aren't ignorant of "internet culture", they just have terrible opinions, and they're as likely to be underage as a native 4chan user is.>The fact that a lot of people don't feel the need to do this is a pretty major cause of 4chan's problems.4chan is not a sekret club.
>>158492>Newfags aren't an issue. Redditors and tumblrdrones are, but these people aren't ignorant of "internet culture",You know that Reddit and Tumblr are newfag-central, right?You're aware that most people coming to the site find out about it through places like Reddit and Tumblr, right?The fact is, these "redditfags" you're complaining about ARE newfags, you fuck.>4chan is not a sekret club.It would be better if it was.
>>158492question: why do you people always scapegoat people from other sites when /v/ has been this awful for years now
>>158497>You know that Reddit and Tumblr are newfag-central, right?Not really.>It would be better if it was.Go back to /b/ you shitposter.
>>158492It's a rule that's there for legal purposes and those alone. Like I said, it does apply some significant pressure, but little of it is successful whatsoever. What I'm hoping for is that the rule isn't given so much emphasis in the 4chan community, especially on boards like /b/ and /v/. So what if you're underage or a minor? Don't shitpost and you're fine by me.>not a sekret clubPic related
>>158492>4chan is not a sekret club.Did I say it was? It's a community that tends to have certain (fairly minimal) expectations of its users. There is a culture and an accepted style of posting, and laughable as it sounds, on most boards an expected level of intelligence and knowledge (albeit not a particularly high one).
>>158506Damn pic is "unoriginal."Unoriginal my ass.Picture: http://i.imgur.com/kVhfe.png
Considering I've been on 4chan since I was 14 (Relax mods, I'll be 19 soon), I don't really see a problem with underagedb& users who follow the philosophy "We are all white, 18-30 year old faggots"While I disagree with "Gaiafags being a problem" (I'm an active Gaian, and a lurker of 4chan at best), I feel its more of a bunch of fail trolling.Feel free to disregard this, its been a while since I cared to collect my thoughts in an organized manner.
>>158501>did not address any point, just says "not really">finishes with "go back to /b/"Congratulations, not only have you lost, but you are also confirmed to be the cancer.However, anyone here will tell you that the boards have gotten progressively shittier over the years. Every board, /a/, /v/, /g/, /k/ etcThat "shittierness" of the boards is due almost entirely to 4chan's rising popularity. More new people come here. They are uninformed, and dumb the population down. The next wave of newcomers hit, and voila, same thing.It's gotten to the point that what was originally 4chan's identity has spread to other websites, causing newfags to come here because they think rage comics are SO COOL AND FUNNI, XD. Not to mention the mods and janitors are having a hard time policing boards that move at lightning fast speed because of all the users.No, 4chan is not a secret club. But if you actually had to be generally informed to find it, like back in 2006 when I first came here, it would have stayed a much better place.
>>158479you people really think people brand fucking new to 4chan know about all the different board in jokes? They come from reddit or wherever and that's how they act. Why would you think they would know to lurk?
>>155006The boards on 4chan are anonymous, so anyone can claim whatever he wants about his age with no way to prove the opposite. Posters who are underage but don't stick out as underage and keep their age for themselves obviously don't cause any problems. And faggots who are retarded enough to admit being underage should get rightfully banned.
>>158517What is there to address? You just said "Reddit and Tumblr are newfags". That's not the impression I get, Reddit are memefaggots and tumblr are fat feminist fangirls, but for the most part these userbases aren't new to the internet, they just have new homes. It's the same war that used to be fought with Gaia and Livejournal.
>>158517>cancerMore shitposting /b/ lingo.>However, anyone here will tell you that the boards have gotten progressively shittier over the years. Every board, /a/, /v/, /g/, /k/ etcDid you ever consider that this is because those boards are retarded? No, it has to be some other site's fault, since 4chan users are exceptionally brilliant.>It's gotten to the point that what was originally 4chan's identity has spread to other websites, causing newfags to come here because they think rage comics are SO COOL AND FUNNI, XD. Not to mention the mods and janitors are having a hard time policing boards that move at lightning fast speed because of all the users.Do you think this is a new thing? It's not like 4chan got popular all on its own, 4chan got most of its culture from LUE and SA.How old are you? 14? I bet you weren't even around in 2006.>No, 4chan is not a secret club. But if you actually had to be generally informed to find it, like back in 2006 when I first came here, it would have stayed a much better place.Fuck off to onionland if you want an edgy sekret club.
>>155434>Just put on that underage people aren't allowed in non-work safe forums and the job's done.That's a terrible idea. Kids who are willing to view NSFW material aren't going to be deterred by the rules, so the only thing your proposal will do is encourage thin-skinned normalbabbies to shit up the SFW boards. If you can't handle the general nature of the site, you shouldn't be on 4chan.Personally, I don't think moot should change the age rule, because the quality of the site will drop immensely if he does. This isn't third grade where everyone is entitled to an equal slice of the Social Pie.
>>158529Why do you have this absolutely dumbfounding idea that newfag means "to the internet at large" and not to 4chan in general?What Tumblr and Reddit see is a watered down, excessively filtered view of now-dead 4chan memes from 2007.What has happened here is that we (you) have a misunderstanding about the term "newfag" in that I am using it in the 4chan context and you are using it in the retarded context in a way that nobody else on this website uses it. Two possibilities spring to mind - that you are either too fucking stupid to understand what "newfag" meant in the context of this website, or you yourself are new here and didn't lurk enough to figure it out.
>>158524>Why would you think they would know to lurk?In my opinion, it's more of a mindset than actual knowledge of specific expectations, let alone the details of the culture (in-jokes etc.). People seem to think that just because they use the internet, have experience with a few of the basic sites most people use, they can waltz into any other site and post exactly as they would on the sites they already know without regard for the other people there or the way they've been using it. As I've said elsewhere, it is really a pervasive form of arrogance, or maybe simple naivete if I'm being generous. In either case, I just wish people would go to new sites with a mindset like "let me see what this site is like, maybe I can post on it sometime" rather than "I really like this site and I want to join in and post stuff on it".
>>158517>lightning fast speed because of all the users.You've hit the nail on the head right there. The issue here is not the reddit, or gaia, or any other similar site. The issue is that 4chan seems to be collapsing under its own weight. The massive influx of posters has caused many boards to lack in quality, since the atmosphere is that of "post now, think later."
>>158532>hurr durr cancer is /b/ shithttp://spiderchan.com/srch/Search "cancer" for /b/find 0 results>ever consider that those boards are just shit?No, because they used to be relatively good, fun places to post. Now they are not. As I've mentioned before, are you implying that the decrease in quality came from people just getting dumber over the years?It's much more likely that new people have caused the change, not people who were previously smart somehow evolving into shitposters.>4chan's culture came from other websitesWhich now do not contribute much to the internet culture because 4chan grew on its own>are you 14 or something?Way to prove my point about how underage posters are seen. However, you have no way of backing your shit up, which seems to be a common trend in your shitty posts.>Fuck off to onionland if you want an edgy sekret club.>he thinks tor is a secret clubOh me oh my
>>158535>Personally, I don't think moot should change the age rule, because the quality of the site will drop immensely if he does.Oh yeah, all those underaged children who desperately want to post on 4chan but restrain themselves due to the rules will start posting.>>158537>What Tumblr and Reddit see is a watered down, excessively filtered view of now-dead 4chan memes from 2007.Lol, half of 4chan is dead memes. The only ones with quality content are usually the ones that don't sperg out over newfags and other similar things.>>158540>People seem to think that just because they use the internet, have experience with a few of the basic sites most people use, they can waltz into any other site and post exactly as they would on the sites they already know without regard for the other people there or the way they've been using it. As I've said elsewhere, it is really a pervasive form of arrogance, or maybe simple naivete if I'm being generous. In either case, I just wish people would go to new sites with a mindset like "let me see what this site is like, maybe I can post on it sometime" rather than "I really like this site and I want to join in and post stuff on it".This obsession with culture and fitting in is the reason 4chan is so shit right now, because everyone thinks it's a sekret club, and /v/ thinks it can get away with off-topic shitposts and dubs because it's "culture". No one's supposed to know if you lurked hard enough because everyone is anonymous anyway!
>>158547>Search "cancer" for /b/>find 0 resultshttp://knowyourmeme.com/memes/the-cancer-that-is-killing-bWeren't you the one complaining about dead memes from 2007?>It's much more likely that new people have caused the change, not people who were previously smart somehow evolving into shitposters.But global rule 2 isn't an anti-newfag rule. It's not intended to be, and it doesn't work like that in practice. You're simply delusional.>he thinks tor is a secret clubNo it's not but 12 year olds can't tell the difference
>>158556>sekret clubGoddamn, you can be frustrating. I don't think it is a sekrit club, I've never said anything like that. Being expected to become minimally familiar with a board does not make it a sekrit club.>/v/ thinks it can get away with off-topic shitposts and dubs because it's "culture"But that is ultimately just shitty content, people who lurk and aren't idiots should know that they should not post it. I am not attempting to defend "/v/ culture" or anything similar with my argument.>No one's supposed to know if you lurked hard enough because everyone is anonymous anyway!It should be directly obvious from one's posts; the true factual information doesn't matter.I do agree with you that what has become obsessive calling out of posters that seem even remotely 'new' is a big issue. The quality control that lurking en masse can provide should happen naturally, unforced, without having to spawn an over-the-top reaction that in a lot of cases really does go into 'sekrit club' territory.
>>158547/a/ tried so hard not to be /v/ that people found it funny and started to shit it up. If you didn't try do hard maybe it wouldn't have happened.
>>158586>Goddamn, you can be frustrating. I don't think it is a sekrit club, I've never said anything like that. Being expected to become minimally familiar with a board does not make it a sekrit club.Then why do you think underage users are incapable of familiarizing themselves with a board? Does this process take years?>But that is ultimately just shitty contentSo are buzzwords like newfag, underage, autistic, reddit/tumblr, etc.>>158602>/a/ tried so hard not to be /v/Is that when they try to ban shit they don't like from being discussed (like naruto) by spamming and shitposting threads? Because that's /v/.
>>158556Arguing with you about the rule is pointless because Moot understands why he needs it and you don't want to.
>>158609>Is that when they try to ban shit they don't like from being discussed (like naruto) by spamming and shitposting threads? Because that's /v/.Yes. That is them defending against newfags. Ask yourself.
>>158610Actually, moot doesn't think it's a necessary rule, and only kept it because a lot of people complained.http://archive.foolz.us/q/search/text/underage/capcode/admin/order/desc/
>>158634I think "I don't like it therefore I'm going to shitpost whenever you talk about it" posters are more annoying and threaten the quality of the site a lot more than mythical newfags are.
Does anyone's age really matter? I mean as long as they are lurking or aren't shit posting, what's the big deal?Or do people like being hipsters and saying "get off my lawn".
>>158640Everyone seems to know that but them. They think they're saving their board. Marital threads where people were actually discussing things have gone that way too. It's an impressive sight.
>>158609>Then why do you think underage users are incapable of familiarizing themselves with a board?I don't. Have I said that anywhere? Not trying to be a dick but are you paying attention to the post IDs? You're arguing with multiple people, I've been talking about familiarization in general without trying to tie it to specific age groups.>So are buzzwords like newfag, underage, autistic, reddit/tumblr, etc.I just reread all my posts in this thread and I don't think I used any of those words even once. The closest I've come is the use of the word 'lurk' (and maybe 'sekrit/sekret club'), though I tried to at least come up with other ways to phrase it sometimes.
>>158646Naruto threads*
>>158646I just hope moot doesn't cave into those types of posters any more than he already has. I understand why /mlp/ was necessary, but it sets a really bad precedent if that can happen to any fandom.>>158649>I don't. Have I said that anywhere? Not trying to be a dick but are you paying attention to the post IDs? You're arguing with multiple people, I've been talking about familiarization in general without trying to tie it to specific age groups.Not really, I've been posting while watching AGT and the DNC so I'm not really paying attention. >_>
I think to enter 4chan you would have to deposit $1 give your full name address phone number and a picture of your face with time stamp
Underage posters, for the most part, 14-16 year olds don't know how to conduct themselves well, that is why they shitpost, sometimes ironically, but most of the times because they're fucking retarded. I'm not saying that there aren't good underage posters but to say that underage posters should be allowed to on an "adult" site is ridiculous. /b/ has gone to shit, I know it has never been good, etc but just take a look at /b/'s current state:-post ending in XX does Y-this guy slaps your girlfriend's ass-image dumps-spiderman spam in pretty much every threadThat'swhat makes up /b/ right now. The "true" discussion boards have also gone to shit. These underage posters don't the first thing about proper discussion, how to build an argument, tell the difference between opinion and fact. They're just retarded. If you look at /sp/ or /tv/, discussion barely ever occurs on those boards, it's all forced memes brought on by the underage shit posters, because it's so fun XD edgy epic, i like it!!1 I know there is no way of regulating this but the rule should be enforced and taken more seriously.
>>158663It won't. Few people feel the need to talk about Naruto. Pokemon and MLP got everywhere and caused big problems. Naruto is one small not-problem for /a/. People just deal with the fact they can't talk about Naruto.
All the posters on this thread why don't you take a seat right over there?
A metric fuckton of underage kids think that they're special snowflakes. They think that, just because they're 16, doesn't mean their opinions aren't valid. Sure, OTHER 16 year old's opinions might be shitty and not worth listening too, but not theirs! Their opinions are thoughtful and reasonable.Believe me, if you feel this way, you're fucking full of shit. I thought like that when I was 16. Lots of people do. And in five years time, I looked back at myself and realized what a dumb little shit I was. No matter how smart or special or perfectly mature you think you are, in five years time, you'll look back and realize what a dumb little shit you used to be. No matter how much you believe you're different, that you're one of the few mature, sane teenagers; the truth is, you're just as dumb and immature as any other 16 year old kid.
>>158704A metric fuckton of adults think their opinions aren't shit either. And you know how true that is.
>>158679I don't remember Pokemon causing huge problems and neither does anyone else.
>>158704personally I think a lot of people I know got mored retarded between 16 and 26
Meh I'm 15 and I don't think it's fair that I'm not allowed to browse 4chan just because the government say so. It's doing me no harm.
>>158725See, this is the problem.As long as underagers keep quiet about it and don't try to be special snowflakes, I couldn't care less.
>>158725are you that faggot that let kid draw on you?also we don't need 15 yearolds shitting up our boards, /b/ is immature as it is.
>>158729I'm probably more mature than most of the man-children on here.
>>158725>It's doing me no harm.See, that's not the problem. The problem is more that people on here, an 18+ website that was quite specifically not made to be all-inclusive and family friendly, justifiably don't want to read the opinions of a 15 year old.
>>158730no you think this because you're 15 and can slip under the radar occasionally. and If you can act at least 18 and get away with it then don't post your age and you wont get b&.
>>158737>act at least 18Can you define this
>446 posts and 13 image replies omitted. Click here to view.Jesus fucking christ>>158728What this guy said. This isn't even an issue worth discussing.
>>158736Moot was 15 when he created 4chan, I'll browse 4chan while I'm 15. Seriously though nobody over the age of 20 should be here.
>>158736Why are you implying that allowing teenagers on 4chan would turn it into a hugbox. You were an edgy little shit when you were 15.
>Spoilers: moot legally probably has to say 18+ on some boards to avoid flack.
>>158743when moot was 15 /b/ wasn't a board. 4chan was about anime. Even /a/ was anime & random until they split them into 2 separate boards later.
>>158750Are you implying that 18+ material never got posted back then?
>>158750http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4chan"The "random" board, /b/, follows the design of Futaba Channel's Nijiura board. It was the first board created, and is by far 4chan's most popular board, with 30% of site traffic.[56][57] "
>>158754>implyingno i'm saying /b/ wasn't its own board then so fucked up shit wasnt the only thing poosted.>>158758i had it the other way around /a/ split from /b/
>>158762>It was over 9000Cracked a smile.
This whole thread is fucking carnage, akin to the state of 4chan's boards in comparison to the glorious past. A fistful of you poor delusional pissants cannot seem to comprehend that the root of our torrential issue has always led back to the underage community.Setting things straight--legal issues aside--we can confidently say that every community has its portion of idiots. I've seen no exceptions to this, with some groups having more morons than the next. Applying this logic to 4chan, of-fucking-course we will have irrational shitposting adults, as will any civilized society or midnight bar have its village idiot dwelling within. Therefore, we can always expect some degree of shitposting anywhere on the internet.But the underageb& are another tale, with a complete reversal of the aforementioned rule. I'll try not to stray too far into the realistic scientific explanation of the matter; but studies, empirical evidence, and general observations have proved, time and time again, that your average teenager is a mindless fucknut in comparison to your average adult. Those delirious dumbfucks plagued with special snowflake syndrome prove this point, and I can bet my bloody chopped-up dick there's one reading this thread right now. As for the small minority of underageb& who appear to be the exception, they are still nothing divine in relative comparison to your above-average university scholar.In terms of 4chan culture (specifically /b/) and the internet in general and how underage cretins have trashed it, all I can ask is: WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED? A once remarkable cesspool of all deprived and cynical content, our culture has downgraded to shallow and vapid content; pure fucking garbage. And I'm not speaking of /b/'s nostalgic stream of piss and shit, rather the fact that our bleak anonymity and creations are now the shameful product of viral advertising and attention-seeking cunts.
>>158781Hot topic, Web 2.0, MOTHERFUCKING ADVICE-DOG DERIVATIVES THAT WERE ONCE NEVER QUALIFIED AS MEMES, and every other abomination known are the contibuting factor. But who's the face behind those who marketed the memes? Who are the shitheaded faggots that buy into that shit? No fucking doubt about it -- the underageb&.Presently, memes are no longer the once inside jokes they were. An entire culture shattered into a million fucking pieces, because of inconsiderate degenerates like the underage. In fact, there is no fucking definition of meme anymore. Every dark and edgy kid throws the fucking word around, and dubs all creations as such. We can only look back upon what was once ours, before the cancer seeped into our culture.I cannot even begin to coherently phrase the history of 4chan with the cancer that annihilated us. Such atrocious ideas make my blood boil. To those of you who remain, those that spent their nights on 4chan, be it 5 or 7 years ago, I raise my bottle of piss to you. Underageb& may have broke the face of anonymity, and the culturally inept may dwell within this thread, but I can say the past experiences shall not be forgotten. This entire entry is derogatorily devoted to those that managed to brake the controversial rules 1 & 2. Now look what fucking happened? Do you not see what has become of this? And now we raise this thread to question whether or not we should allow or discuss underageb& being beneficial? You brainwashed, back-stabbing bastards--the circle-jerking cancerous fucks of you all.This is exactly why we can't have nice things. I can only hope, one fucking day, that all your base are belong to us, as it once were and should have been. Something like this shouldn't be up for debate; the answer is plain fucking obvious.
