[ art / civ / cult / cyb / diy / drg / feels / layer / lit / λ / q / r / sci / sec / tech / w / zzz ] archive provided by lainchan.jp

lainchan archive - /q/ - 12482

File: 1481693817478.png (237.39 KB, 300x250, yeah.gif)


> This board has IDs.
What happened to them?


File: 1481753671780.png (27.53 KB, 135x200, twot.jpg)

fuarrrk IDs


File: 1481787726451.png (75.51 KB, 200x160, SIMALIN.jpg)

To elaborate, IDs don't actually add anything of value to the discussion and tend to encourage users to behave/post in a way that is consistent with their previous posts.

This isn't necessarily a good thing if you want to produce an evolving, dynamic discussion. It's well-suited to forum users arguing repetitively back and forth over the points they've already made that they're attempting to have validated by "other users". If a user actually changes their position or chooses to argue an entirely different point based on new information presented or simply to gain another perspective, the behavior "appears" to be logically inconsistent and the individual can be singled out as hypocritical. In reality, ego-free logical fluidity facilitates deep learning and has been one of the defining factors of imageboard culture since the beginning.



The board was deleted and then partially restored from backup. I am not sure if the IDs were properly recovered and accidentally disabled or not recovered properly.

I have re-enabled IDs for this board in the configuration.


Btw, i just remembered that some other dude got with a delay of 5 days "my" ID in the same thread. So what is the purpose of an ID when it is not unique?


File: 1482202727270.png (466.72 KB, 125x200, ai-D.jpeg)

Mistaken identity, perhaps?


File: 1488250051704.png (46.89 KB, 200x200, 1424202260770-0.jpg)

So, here's why I must respectfully disagree: On a political board, you are inevitably going to get the following:

1. Individuals pretending to be two different groups of people fighting over different sides of a political argument, intentionally making one side (who will lash out at other users and otherwise behave unpleasantly) "lose" to make the "winner" look better.

2. Individuals who pretend to be multiple people advocating for the same idea, making it look as if many people on the board hold an opinion when they don't.

3. People who are literally paid to come and do 1 & 2. This is called consensus cracking, and the goal is to get you to side with a political stance based on personality, bandwagoning, and emotion rather than evidence.

There are obviously ways to get around the defense IDs provide. However, I've found that the people who engage in this behavior are often too lazy or stupid to figure it out.


File: 1488466959565.png (210.76 KB, 200x113, ps00ky.png)

You're not wrong. This is part of why I suggested Kalyx derezz mainstream political discussions long before /civ/ was created.

I understand your concerns and have long accepted those realities as being a unique part of identity-free culture. To me, that's part of what sets imageboard culture apart from forum culture, where identities are persistent and egos come into play.

If you don't expect blatant s‍h‍i‍l‍l‍ing‍ in any political discussion, particularly those with IDs, you risk misunderstanding the wired. Persistent or otherwise, IDs are easily spoofed by genuine s‍h‍i‍l‍l‍s without much effort. Trusting the authenticity of persistent IDs on the internet is missing the point. The false sense authenticity reinforced by persistent IDs is part of the problem.