4chan Hardcore
⚡ ALL INFORMATION CLICK HERE 👈🏻👈🏻👈🏻
4chan Hardcore
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A screenshot containing a list of 4chan's boards
↑ moot (October 1, 2003). "Welcome" . 4chan . Retrieved August 2, 2008 .
↑ Lev Grossman (September 9, 2008). "The Master of Memes" . TIME . Archived from the original on 2008-07-24 . Retrieved 2008-08-01 .
↑ Nick Douglas (January 18, 2008). "What The Hell Are 4chan, ED, Something Awful, And "b"?" . Gawker.com . Retrieved 2008-08-01 .
↑ Jamin Brophy-Warren (September 9, 2008). "Modest Web Site Is Behind a Bevy of Memes" . The Wall Street Journal . Retrieved 2008-08-01 .
↑ David Sarno (2008-05-25). "Web Scout exclusive! Rick Astley, king of the 'Rickroll,' talks about his song's second coming" . The Los Angeles Times . Retrieved January 8, 2008 .
This short article about technology can be made longer. You can help Wikipedia by adding to it .
Welcome to a sneak preview of the new design for Wikipedia!
We would love your feedback on our changes
4chan is an English language website based on the Japanese Futaba Channel where people can post and discuss pictures and other images. Sites such as these are called imageboards. It was started in 2003 by "moot" also known as Christopher Poole, who was 15 years old at the time. On the website, users post pictures and discuss them. When the site started, it was for discussing anime and manga , but now many other topics are discussed. [2] One of the boards on the site, called "/b/", is dedicated to random topics and is often mentioned in media . [3] Several Internet memes have started at 4chan, including lolcats and rickrolling . [4] [5] People have associated it with the alt-right , Neo-Nazis and Holocaust deniers , as well as those part of the Red-Brown coalition, due to there being sections devoted to them.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome to a sneak preview of the new design for Wikipedia!
We would love your feedback on our changes
Yes, it is. There were many earnest comments regarding proposed content on this locked topic. It appears that whoever has taken it upon themselves to manage this page has lost sight of that, possibly because of miles of inane chatter, but no single person can be the judge of the relevancy of a whole discussion page! This is simply unacceptable by any standard.
users of 4chan attacked ashley tisdales website by spamming the forums with gore after she redid the rickroll song —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.255.24.242 ( talk ) 10:52, 26 July 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
I think this shouldnt even be mentioned in the article, it wasnt so important and things like that happen almost every day in 4chan. Jim88Argentina ( talk ) 05:07, 27 July 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
Having done a fair bit of work cleaning this up, I'm thinking of nominating it for GA (and then move on to FA at some stage). Anyone have any comments on this? — Giggy 08:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
There is a piece that's going to be published in the August 3rd edition of New York Times Magazine [1] dealing with trolls, /b/, and Mitchell Henderson. Just putting it out there. Pacific Coast Highway { talk • contribs } 01:25, 2 August 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
I removed the text "The site's "/b/" board is particularly notorious" as "notorious" is not an objective fact, but someone's opinion. Who has the right to state something is "notorious"? It wasn't sourced or anything, but it was re-added without explanation by Giggy . What gives? how do you turn this on 00:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
4chan has several boards devoted to heterosexual pornography, including "Hardcore", "Sexy Beautiful Women", and "Yuri". Only one board is devoted to gay male images and they must be softcore yaoi illustrations, which is a niche that mainly appeals to heterosexual women. Posting images of male pornography involving real men results in banning from the "random" board. The promise of "random" banning is a smokescreen. I have noticed that the article has been scrubbed of the "fags" references, which is nice to see, but the site's philosophy is still clearly one that does not allow full participation by gay and bisexual men. I would like to see 4chan publicly state that it has this anti-gay policy, instead of hiding behind "random" banning.
If anyone is surprised by what I've written, note that the "hardcore" board, which should encompass both heterosexual and homosexual pornography given its general name, demands only heterosexual content according to 4chan's FAQ which says "Straight (male/female) pornography only." 4chan also promises that anyone who complains about their policies publicly will by banned.
4chan is also notable for its common use of homophobic labels such as fag and faggot. Fag is used as a suffix for a variety of group titles.
Dangit, now I wish I had come up with that one, PCH... But for future reference, the line is "not your personal army". Still, it was a good one. -- Ghost Stalker ( Got a present for ya! | Mission Log ) 04:24, 5 August 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
I'm sorry, but what I'm hearing here is that somebody got bullied and now wants to try to make it some kind of lightning rod "issue". Sorry. But the woeful, awful, slings-and-arrows injustices of a random pornographic website are not notable except to those they inconvenience- er, I mean, deeply wound and wrong. - Vianello ( talk ) 04:18, 5 August 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
...ok. Let's start again. This time show me the source that you are going to use for your claim. What part of the rules/faq are you going to cite and what is the url? Protonk ( talk ) 04:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
I'm not about to jump into this full-bore, but I will point out that /b/ has, over the course of a day, SEVERAL threads full of homosexual pornography. -- Dante Alighieri | Talk 16:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
/hc/ is the hard alternative to /s/. It says so right in the rules you want to quote, OP. If you're so upset by this, just email moot. If he gets enough emails saying "We want a REAL gay board!" he's more likely to do so. And besides, think about it. You complain about the anti-gay bias of 4chan, down to people using the word fag as a suffix to denote groups of people. Do you really think a gay board would be at all well received? I wish there was a gay board, even though I myself am not gay. It's only fair, after all, and if I don't want to look at gay porn, I don't look at it. My suggestion is not to bitch on Wikipedia about it, because we can do absolutely nothing about it. Go to moot with your grievances. Howa0082 ( talk ) 22:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
4chan is full of all kinds of posts specifically crafted to incite drama, posted by users who have more of an intent to troll than an intent to express their hatred of any certain minority. While I HAVE seen hateful treatment by users of male homosexuals in particular (I haven't looked recently, but I doubt the hardcore board bans for lesbians, and never, in all my years, have I ever seen such a thread deleted or its OP banned for a lesbian thread), they certainly aren't as big a focus of /b/tard hate as, say, furries or Scientologists. While terms such as newfag, oldfag, Ausfag, and Britfag are prevalent still, most of these are at worst bastardized pejoratives which have lost their meaning, much like the word motherfucker is a stock insult rather than an implication that someone actually fucks their own mother, and the rest are often just friendly, if a bit insulting to the uninitiated, general terms for whatever specific group they are mentioning. At least in my time browsing 4chan, I've treated this behavior as relatively harmless trolling at worst, and I don't really think a sizeable majority of /b/tards have an intense hate and dislike for gays, male or female. And in the context of the hardcore board, if you want my guess, I'd bet that homosexual pictures are banned simply because that's not the kind of porn that the people demanded, and that instead of getting a relatively healthy board, moot would instead get a board that serves only to generate mounds of complaints from people bitching about how the content is not to their liking. ( Steampowered ( talk ) 06:06, 6 August 2008 (UTC)). Reply [ reply ]
To quote the talk page guidelines : "The purpose of a Wikipedia talk page is to provide space for editors to discuss changes to its associated article or project page. Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views."
If there aren't reliable sources that discuss these claims of homophobia etc etc, Wikipedia doesn't care. John Nevard ( talk ) 05:05, 9 August 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
The term "duck" was not wordfiltered from "egg", it was wordfiltered from "loli". I remember this very clearly, I even have some of the dumb photoshops that were made from that era. I even checked to make sure, and I couldn't find anything pre-2008 that shows that "egg" wordfiltered to "duck" in 2005. A popular meme from that time was "is this loli?", which turned into "is this duck?" (google for '"is this duck?' 4chan' and you'll spot plenty of references pre-2008). The duckroll was the result of people claiming there was a "hot duck thread", which was the duckroll. Duck replaced the former "loli" wordfilter, which was "Thomas Jefferson". I have no idea where "egg" came from, but I'd guess it's to disassociate themselves from lolicon, keeping the advertisers happy, or that they don't want to acknowledge that one of the most popular internet memes originated from a lolicon joke. Even a simple google for "4chan wordfilters" will bring up old discussion threads detailing the wordfilters of the past. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.20.169.146 ( talk ) 08:01, 14 December 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
There are quite a few news articles about 4chan, but certain cultural contributions such as lolcats and so forth could use further research to find sources. I put the template indicating that the article requires additional references. Thanks for understanding, I hope there is a way to confirm the start of trends here, maybe with the archive.org Wayback Machine or a similar site. natezomby ( talk )
It should probably be mentioned that moot's real "Real" name is apparently Robert Bopkins. There's an image of him at some convention and that's the name on his nametag. Also, the Christopher Poole pseudonym is probably a play on the initials for Child pornography. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.187.194.74 ( talk ) 11:07, 27 August 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
DNS problems this time, according to the status page. 4chan has had a lot of technical problems the past month.-- Ryudo ( talk ) 07:34, 10 August 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
They didn't start on 4chan, they've been around basically since the beginning of the internet. -- 76.25.197.215 ( talk ) 23:51, 11 August 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
This is, in fact, exactly what happens when rules 1 & 2 are broken. For 4chan, all publicity is BAD publicity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.75.120 ( talk ) 23:22, 11 January 2009 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
Should anything be said about this ?
Gravelz ( talk ) —Preceding undated comment was added at 20:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
The mudkipz explanation is killing me, we can at least make it right —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonaturservice ( talk • contribs ) 06:18, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Oh, thank you man. Especially when they cited Times Online and said that EncyclopediaDramatica INVENTS 1337speak...who wrote that on, ED DOCUMENTS it, not INVENTS it. I put in some comments about it..
-Warsie —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.107.9.155 ( talk ) 21:12, 5 September 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
" It has also received media attention for its attacks against other websites and Internet users " The site is merely an imageboard. If we start saying that "4chan" attacks websites then could we not also say that it distrubtes child pornography or distributes far-right (and far-left) propaganda? Oursroute ( talk ) 23:00, 4 September 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
Review this source for notability. http://www.nolanchart.com/article4803.html It says Pekka-Eric Auvinen also posted one of his threats for the Jokela school shooting on 4chan . -- William Ortiz ( talk ) 22:23, 14 September 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
Aparently 4chan got some press (not much, less than a paragraph) in Slate . They even linked directly to /b/. I don't think 1 throwaway "Explainer" column is enough to merit a section yet, but something else will come up mentioning it. Protonk ( talk ) 03:23, 18 September 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
Holy crap, 16 (another came through WHILE I TYPED!) Google Alerts emails on this... on average, 2/3 news stories on each. I don't have the time to sift through them all now, but if there is something important that we've missed in the article (I went through and added an initial dump of content yesterday) then please add it in... I'll sort it when I'm next online. Giggy ( talk ) 22:32, 18 September 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
Should this be added into the article? DrinkThineCookies ( talk ) 14:51, 21 September 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
An editor has raised a concern that no cited reference links 4chan on anonymous. I don't want to revert the removal of the reference again so I'm inviting everyone to talk it over here. I know for a fact that Dibbell notes the connection between 4chan and Anon but I'm sure other sources do to. Protonk ( talk ) 03:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
I don't know if 4chan could be, you know, recommended to anyone really... or why an article about it should be "featured". The article itself is a bunch of inside jokes and mostly serves to show that there's a substantial intersection set of wikipedians and /b/tards (sheesh)... -- Sigmundur ( talk ) 11:18, 28 September 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
It looks like the Rickroll fans have not only continued to vote for Rick Astley as EMA's best act ever but also raided Tokio Hotel forums and DDoS attacks on fan sites ( [5] ). Does anyone have thoughts on this?
How is there not at least a Shoop Da Whoop article, if not an entire page dedicated to it? Surely it's one of the more well known memes, and I think it deserves a mention. I'm too much of a /b/tard to write enough about it, but I call on others to heed my plea. The world needs to know of Da Shoop's origins! Mokushiroku no Yami ( talk ) 17:37, 13 October 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
Someone keeps deleting this from the talk page. I say ban him. Here's what I wrote:
I find it highly disturbing that this article fails to even mention that 4chan is a network of/meeting place for pedofiles, rapists and murderers. You wouldn't create the article about Hitler without mentioning that he was a nazi. This article is obviously written by people who condone with such terrible things, and tries to keep it hidden from the public what the site actually is.
One who reads this article will get the impresion that it's just a regular harmless discussion board-- DnivyØ ( talk ) 19:39, 14 October 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
Removed more vandalism from DnivyØ. Allegations of Paedophilia against an imageboard are serious business, and without a source it cannot be considered good practice to continue to state it. JustIgnoreMe ( talk ) 19:14, 7 November 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
lolcats were about late 2006 early 2007. O RLY had been in circulation before then. I never remember Caturday always involving cats as image macros. Caturday was just image floods of cats (in an attempt to emulate the "cats" board on 2chan). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.12.58.68 ( talk ) 13:58, 15 October 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
Didn't that little meme origionate on deviantart in the first place? after there april fools joke of changing everyones icon to a small 50x50 of a mudkip and the caption "so I herd u liek mudkips"? Sp!der ( talk ) 12:14, 30 October 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
Articles like this should be kept up to date to remain FA. So before I list this at FAR.
It may not require a new section but should probably be mentioned.-- Otterathome ( talk ) 17:18, 30 October 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
Another source, from NY Times Malwebolence. The trolls among us -- Enric Naval ( talk ) 02:54, 11 December 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
Could someone please do that. Prepost ( talk ) 14:05, 28 November 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
Futaba Channel has been nominated for deletion. A suggestion has been made at the deletion page for it to be merged here. 76.66.195.159 ( talk ) 03:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
I don't understand how the 4chan site works and this article didn't make it any clearer. Why would anyone want to contribute to a site that only retains the contributions for 24 hours? How can they follow threads when they expire so fast? How do they keep track of what's read, like on a normal bulletin board or forum system? Do people use something else than a web browser to read it? It seems completely different from anything else, and the differences should be mentioned in the article. -- 94.192.125.169 ( talk ) 00:10, 17 December 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
It's not really a contribution, it is weak and temporary entertainment. The site is not serious and should never ever be taken seriously (alot of abuse, racism, sexism etc takes place there and is far from serious but rather bawdy humor) And to answer your question on keeping track of whats posted and read; It isn't. 4chan is anonymous plain and simple. 58.107.55.202 ( talk ) 11:46, 25 December 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
Think of it as instant messaging with pictures. That's all. A popular imageboard is basically a cross between a forum and instant messaging, although less popular imageboards tend to have the content stay around for more than a day, possibly a week or more. It's a website, you don't need anything other than a browser to use it. If you want stuff to stay around, you have to rely on the users themselves. Posts that become popular are often replicated by way of "copypasta," meaning something that is copied and pasted. A pun of copy+paste and pasta. Images that become popular are often saved and reposted by regulars, as well. Basically, it's a community where the popularity of contributions in the minds of the users makes them last, rather than any other factor. 124.180.117.57 ( talk ) 00:01, 29 December 2008 (UTC) Reply [ reply ]
This article says 4chan is an imageboard website, which according to that article is an Internet forum . Neither really talks about archival, except when related to gravedigging trolls, implying that old threads are still available. I for one have never used any other forum where content older than 24 hours was not available, so I don't think 4chan or maybe imageboards in general are common forums in that sense. It indeed looks like the people frequenting the 4chan site are doing the machine work themselves. The so called copypasta isn't from any archives but from the users themselves; they keep reposting the same content over and over again, especially on the requests board and in all "sauce" threads. On any other forum reposts would quickly be directed to the previous threads, centralising the knowledge or whatever there. On imageboards known images could easily be compared by a computer to find existing discussion. This is an interesting use of human power for that purpose, and there must be other reasons not to keep the old content
Hannah Stocking Butt
Lindsey Pelas Nude Photos
Peliculas Softcore