Posting mode: Reply
[Return]
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
File
Password(Password used for file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG
  • Maximum file size allowed is 2048 KB.
  • Images greater than 250x250 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Read the rules and FAQ before posting.
  • Post only original content.
  • このサイトについて - 翻訳
    • File : 1272681265.png-(341 KB, 626x691, Screen shot 2010-04-30 at 7.33.44 PM.png)
    341 KB Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)22:34:25 No.8694590  
    Someone at the Economist clearly goes on 4chan. How does this make you feel?

    http://www.economist.com/surveys/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15980787
    >> Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)22:35:34 No.8694605
    Like 4chan's days are numbered.
    >> Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)22:36:07 No.8694609
    Someone at a company counting THOUSANDS of people browses 4chan?! WHAT A STATISTICAL IMPROBABILITY! I AM BAFFLED?!?!!!!!111ELEVEN!!!11!!
    >> Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)22:36:50 No.8694622
    The Economist had a small article on 4chan's little clash with Scientology a while back.
    >> Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)22:38:21 No.8694641
    Didn't read it. How does that show they go to 4chan?
    >> Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)22:39:59 No.8694662
    Tl;dr

    Just quote me the part about 4chan god damn it or get out
    >> Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)22:40:57 No.8694674
    >>8694622
    It was released in early October, if I remember correctly. I read it. It covered all of the main points, but was a little over-dramatic. Memes, legion, Guy Fawkes, etc.
    >> Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)22:41:39 No.8694680
    >>8694641
    reactionimage.jpg
    mootblock.exe
    >> Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)22:41:56 No.8694688
    4chan's been floating around mainstream press, in particular the economist, for fucking ages. Where you been, OP?
    >> Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)22:43:54 No.8694719
    >>8694590
    fail to see what the connection to 4chan is in this artikle
    >> Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)22:47:49 No.8694766
    OP, I think you're confused. 4chan isn't on TV, it's on computers.
    >> Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)22:48:42 No.8694778
    you guys are all dumb.

    the connection with 4chan here is the reaction image.
    >> Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)22:52:03 No.8694820
    >>8694719
    I do not see the connection either as well.
    >> Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)22:54:54 No.8694855
    >Read article
    >4chan isn't even hinted at

    Thanks for wasting my tie OP.
    >> Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)22:58:14 No.8694901
    >>8694855
    I'm not op, but I'm so sorry about your tie :(
    >> Anonymous 04/30/10(Fri)23:01:26 No.8694938
    I've written for the Economist. One article, 2008.

    [Return]
    Delete Post [File Only]
    Password
    Style [Yotsuba | Yotsuba B | Futaba | Burichan]
    Watched Threads
    PosterThread Title
    [V][X]AnonymousPolitical Ignor...
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]EUROFAG!9oHNTFCqdg
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous/r9k/ - now wit...
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]4chon: the...!5loj5TiA7k
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous