/b/ - Site Meta

chill out, normoblaster
yeah, I hate it. It reeks of r9k

I think people obsess over purity too much in general. I don't really care if someone "fits in" on an imageboard, I just want them to contribute good content.

Can someone summarize this issue?

>>6236
What job is it?

>>6241

Thank you for your concise summarization.

It sounds like a common social group phenomenon, I would be more surprised if a community did NOT occasionally experience something similar.

In this case, what kind of people does the 'in' group comprise of? The OP appears to indicate that it is 'normal' people. However, I would argue that if someone is posting here, they are already past 'normal'...

>>6241
The person in question came out and said he doesn't care what people think of him. He doesn't care what we think? Then I don't care about him and his blogging that doesn't care about me. It's ridiculous that you'd fall for such cheap emotional blackmail. Should I say that this thread is persecution and announce my leaving over it? Would you suddenly delete this thread and create another for people to openly discuss their "grievances" with the community?

Everybody wants gatekeeping until the spammy wannabe riajuu who "reluctantly" goes to all the parties and talks about getting smashed in a 2D/random message board under spoiler tags is gatekept.

>>6245
Please do not misuse spoilers.

Gatekeeping the wrong people out kills a community, just as failing to gatekeep the right people out does. I don't see much risk of this site getting flooded by 'normies' (although that could always change in the future) whereas the possibility of excluding potentially constructive posters through excessively high community standards is much more realistic. In this case I think gatekeeping is unwarranted and is likely to do more harm than good.

teenmin thread award

teenmin dindu nuffin

that's exactly what a norm would say, opee

ban the norms that use the word norm

I think there should be ""some"" elitism to ensure that the website is not turned into a culture-war bullshit for either side (/pol/ and /lpol/ die in a hole).
Or maybe we shouldn't discuss our lives in general, that blogging should be verboten.

>>6241
Were those his first posts in the thread or were some of the earlier rude "stop blogging" threads him? The thing to look out for here is whether it's just him expressing his displeasure about a post and getting into an argument or a pattern of posts intended to harass a specific target.

>>6253
>I think there should be ""some"" elitism to ensure that the website is not turned into a culture-war bullshit for either side (/pol/ and /lpol/ die in a hole).
Yes to this, but we already do it.
Elitism in the sense of thinking our community is good and wanting it to be better is an important positive quality. (Although we have to be careful that the particular methods we use to gatekeep are chosen based on effectiveness and not based on blowing off anger.)

>Or maybe we shouldn't discuss our lives in general, that blogging should be verboten.
That's going overboard.

>>6245
It's the blog thread, though. It's where people go to talk about themselves and their life. I don't want to get too much into that specific example apart from it starting when someone invoked the 'norm' thing

>>6251
It's not something moderation is needed for, really. It's far better to talk about it and try to change minds.

Maybe because I'm new to this site I don't quite understand.

What are the 'anti-norms' expecting in a post in the blog board? What kind of stories do they want rather than what was posted?

>>6258
I assume it's about the work complaints

>>6260
whap'im good

>>6258
there are people who like to talk about problems that exist in their head

>>6253
>>6256
The issue with active gatekeeping, especially on imageboards, is that most of the people doing it are either autistic neophobes who hate change even when it's positive, and squeaky wheel types who voice their own personal opinions as if they speak for the whole community.