On Yack Fest and Recent Events

Well, my definition of shitposting is posting memes and lame humor (that's what I used to see on r/danganronpa in 2017). So I was thinking of Reddit-type shitposting, rather than Wikipedia-definition shitposting, which is comparatively A Lighter Shade of Black (or at least, isn't cancer).

Edited by Piterpicher on Feb 15th 2021 at 5:03:12 PM

maybe the proper term is 'troll posting?'' because thats definitely what I find objectionable

Edited by Ultimatum on Feb 15th 2021 at 4:03:11 PM

Posting jokes and memes is fine, in moderation. Nobody's claiming otherwise.

Edited by Fighteer on Feb 15th 2021 at 11:04:17 AM

The perhaps you could consider rewording the 'No shit posting' part to make that bit a clearer,please?

Thanks

Edited by Ultimatum on Feb 15th 2021 at 4:09:21 PM

I'm into "no troll posting". The forum threads are tad boring without jokes and memes that would be given value.

"No troll posting" makes it clearer to me at least

Nope. Here, let’s try Cambridge dictionary.

Or maybe Urban Dictionary.

Or just the Google definition from Oxford Languages.

The problem here really isn’t the definition being used by the moderator team.

Adding definitions for common terms to the rules will just make them incredibly clunky. If people don’t know what the term means they can Google it or ask.

Yeah, we definitely don't want that kind of posts here.

Seems like people are trying to "claim" the term shitposting so it doesn't sound bad. They can get bent. Shitposting is always meant to be disruptive.

It may just be that people learnt the term wrong, it happens.

A problem only emerges if people refuse to listen when it’s explained to them that they’ve been using the term wrong.

Sorry,the people in this case was me,I accept that.

Edited by Ultimatum on Feb 15th 2021 at 4:56:03 PM

It definitely seems that some people on this wiki are using the term "shitposting" even about relatively harmless things such as posting memes and joke posts.

I agree that having the rules actually define what is meant by "shitposting" may be a bit over the top (especially since some shitposters may decide to try to rules-lawyer the situation if they know the exact definition), but perhaps they could say that the mods intend to be not too harsh when judging what is actionable shitposting or not?

Edited by GnomeTitan on Feb 15th 2021 at 6:30:53 PM

Shitposting is... a rather grey and ambiguous term. By its literal definition, yes, it's harmful and does nothing to contribute to the conversation. However, as I've observed all over the internet, there can be different types of shitposting. There's malicious shitposting (trolling, derailing, causing drama, flame wars), and there's benign shitposting (posting funny jokes and memes). It really depends on the intent of the poster.

Note that I'm not in favor of shitposting in general. In a site like this, shitposting is not good and is detrimental to the work effort, so I'm all for closing down shitposting threads.

Edited by DivineFlame100 on Feb 15th 2021 at 9:45:04 AM

"Shitposting" is one of those Internet words that doesn't really have a solid definition anymore. I think any rule about shitposting needs to be clearer on what it means - deliberately off-topic, nonsensical posts meant to disrupt or spam the conversation.

Also not thrilled at a mod throwing around "Anybody who likes [X] is cancer" language that would probably get a normal user suspended for rudeness if they threw it around, but whatever.

Hence why I included the important part of "meant to disrupt or spam the conversation." Like whatever that Dhurxide or whatever guy was doing - specifically trying to make people uncomfortable.

Edited by mightymewtron on Feb 15th 2021 at 1:03:08 PM

So if you have an off-topic thread, wouldn't it make sense for the topic to be mostly off-topic?

Based on how I've seen the term used, I always thought "shitposting" meant posting stupid or low-quality stuff for the sake of humor. I never thought the definition was to derail or disrupt discussions.

• Intentionally derailing a conversation that is focusing on a particular topic (whether the thread is intended to be on-topic or not).
• Posting in a way that is designed to get people angry or upset.
• Dropping memes or out-of-context links/videos for lulz (e.g. Rickrolling).
• Disrupting the readability of conversations with formatting tricks (Zalgo text, breaking post widths, long blocks of meaningless text, etc.).

Topics that are meant specifically for this sort of thing are "shitposting threads" and are now prohibited.

Edited by Fighteer on Feb 15th 2021 at 1:22:55 PM

Should we make a trope page for the term? There's other pages giving definitions for specific forum tropes already.

Those are actually in TRS and looking to be merged into one page. A definition can be added there, but let's not make TRS work harder.

Actually, it's not quite the same thing. Those pages are what used to be called "internet tropes" but are rather just definitions of internet jargon.

While "shitposting" certainly fits in that category, I think there's a case here for an Administrivia page, since it's a term used to describe behaviour that can get a thread shut down (and, presumably, the perpetrator suspended).

I think a general Administrivia page on proper forum decorum would better suffice, if the forums even get Administrivia pages as opposed to keeping the rules in the "Forum Rules" thread(s).

It's a bit off to make people read the wiki for the forum rules. A rules post should be sufficient.

We're a wiki,a dedicated rules page for the forums isn't that absurd when it comes down to it

Edited by Ultimatum on Feb 15th 2021 at 8:19:10 PM

Note it on the FORUM RULES thread if you want people to know about this by editing the OP? Like, it's last been edited more than a year ago, an update is probably overdue.

Edited by Piterpicher on Feb 15th 2021 at 11:01:21 AM

Even though I don't shitpost that often, I'm going to miss the feeling of it, as us Millennials and Zoomers rely on random humor.