Thoughts? (´･ω･`)

かつこいいかんごしです

水です、こりい、みず氷になった。

暢ではない。

-日本語

>みずです
ありがとうございます

>>625
聖水プレイか

女の子のおしっこは聖水なり

>>5183
Well shit, I'd have to put in training if I want to do a standing flip...

>>5183
Do you think you could teach me how?

Of course, friend. My fees are $250/hour. I accept bitcoin as payment. When would you like to start?

>>5188
Damn, so it was all build up to ad. Salesmen are scary

People do drama from nothing these days. Anyway funny talk right there.

I been holding on to reply to this, but as a player that "wasted" a good 200 days worth playing Runescape 2, and oldschool RS. It was without a grind to achive some kind of goal. Either it was making money in game to buy cool gear, or it was to achive a certail level for a quest or item. It was fun and pleasing to reach what ever goal I had in mind then. The grinding itself was never really that fun, but it was something you did to have fun. I got 99 mining as first max skill, and it took avout 3-4 months of just click on a rock... It was painful and I spent most of my time watching other things while i did it. Was it fun? NO! But at the same time, Runescape was so attention catching and imersive and so vast in what one could do in the game. It was for me an escape from the real world after all. Just to focus and achiving things as I was a loser in real life after all. In game, I was just me! :3

I can still thinking of wanting to play it, but I wont as I don't have the energy to waste time at it once again.

Whats even more interesting is - people play MMORPG to meet other players and have fun. And, the things I liked about RS was the other players too, however I liked the casual talking. But i never really liked the aspect of having friends to chat with or hang out with. Just as how similiar this is to imgboards. Most of the time I just played and did my own things while time to time just talking with strangers.

Here's a good video about solo in MMO:
https://youtu.be/b2l2ZxNhCSg

Meh. The video does point out some good points about the "type of loner" but the basic point of view (which is why all MMOs are dead) that games must appeal to the lowest common denominator. No! Not all games are for everyone. Don't drive your core audience away, it also causes others to run away (though you don't care, do you? You got your money, you greedy asshole). For example the ridiculously bad points about not being able to make a loner in a singleplayer game (what are NPCs?) or that loners make sense in an MMO (other players end up being literally NPCs, the loner archetype worked only in multiplayer-required MMOs because only then can you solo gank n00bs, become highly valued for your skillset and therefore a loner 'gun for hire', and other shenanigans). Basically the common issue of hasty conclusions. For example, 90% of lurkers don't post because 'people are interesting', or because they're consuming useful contents like jokes or tech information that can't be found anywhere else? He claims the former with no proof. Similarly, pretending that introverts don't like interacting in an MMO is insane. Again with stupid conclusions from incomplete data. It's hilarious because he pointed out just seconds before that introverts use MMOs as a social fulfillment tool for the social they can't get IRL. Why would they do that if they don't see it as different than IRL, and why would they use it if they didn't want to interact?

People who haven't played MMOs before ~2008 don't know what MMOs really are about. After WoW became big, everything became shit because it tried copy-pasting what they thought made WoW good, which is to say they waited until WoW started becoming shit and copied only the shitty features instead of anything good (for example, making the game even MORE soloable than WoW, which still required and encouraged grouping in various ways until they started implementing complete bullshit like dungeon finders and group finders).

This includes various game design problems like making the games soloable at all, and even worse: making the game more efficient while playing alone, especially combined with "the game only starts at max level" retardation. This combined just as well as you'd expect with trash like discord, turning MMOs into ghost towns. Now they're all massively singleplayer online (MSO) games, no longer MMOs. MSOs can (rarely) be fun in their own right, but they aren't even remotely the same thing. Both osrs and runescape2 unfortunately fall in this bin, for example (the original runescape didn't, but osrs, while it started as an old build and thus the same as old runescape, very quickly started piling on features from nuRunescape, making osrs no longer anything like the good stuff).

On a separate note, ever played disgaea games? I think you'd probably love them. Couple it with some chat program to get your occasional chat while playing for an experience you would surely enjoy.

I found this thread-relevant essay by Andy Gavin, who was a core developer at Naughty Dog in the crash bandicoot/jak & daxter days.
https://all-things-andy-gavin.com/2012/10/29/wow-endgames-vanilla/
He looks fondly on the WoW endgame despite noting how torturous a lot of it was. More interestingly, I think, is the first paragraph pointing out right away how leveling to max was basically a singleplayer game. Continuing this thread's discussion, this is what most people at large mean when they say WoW killed videogames.
His comments discussing the size of the world and zones and the prettyness of them and such is, on the other hand, examples of things WoW did really well, even beyond its peers, that nobody else copied (even though they should, because to be honest, that's the real reason people played until they got to max level).

>>5131
I'm interested in this approach of yours, but frankly I'm half retarded. Do you think you can explain in detail how to evaluate philosophy by 'running simulations'?

>>5195
You can use or write various software like in
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ei_jS-SLWb8
or the videos from this series:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goePYJ74Ydg
Those are more focused on social dynamics simulation but the same basic principle applies.

Taking my example again with the definition of evil, you can simulate actors in the environment that systematically perform evil actions in various proportions, and measure the overall welfare of the species after X simulation steps, much like in the beard example. This way, you can determine if there is alignment between the definition of evil proposed in the philosophy, and the listing of evil actions that are proposed in the philosophy. Another example: you can measure if stability really is achieved in a moral corruption simulation, as machieveli suggested.

Another facet of this kind of simulation is that you can measure how closely the behavior observed based on the philosophical premises proposed adhere to real life behavioral observations. For example, you can simulate a world where everyone is born evil and adapt the simulation in an attempt to make it coherent with real life observations. In the end, you obtain a parsimonious sampling of the models most likely to fit real life, and/or that have the greatest social welfare satisfaction rate, or whatever other metric you are interested in.

Computer simulation is the easiest way to do it and there are several software suites you can find to help set up basic simulations of that kind. Of course you can always use pen and paper and solve differential equations, or use tools from the operational research literature (simplex, waiting lines, inventory profit, and stochastic processes are especially relevant) and model the actors this way.

Reserrections

I have a resurrection in my pants

>>5150
I think I read it in a Micheal Crichton book. (Disclosure)

One of the characters said, about backlash to the feminist movement (circa 1993)

"The rules changed for the men, and they didn't like it. Well soon enough the rules will start changing for the women, and they won't like it either."

Incel is not a philosophy. The first post itt has it right. Also please keep these threads to other venues like 4chan or something.

>>5156
This thread was started two years ago, there's no point complaining about people violating a rule that probably wasn't made yet.

>>5157
Yeah, sorry, I realized too late. That said it shouldn't have been bumped now that the rules are in place. Already in 2022 some people were (rightfully) asking for it as can be seen earlier in this thread.

>>5166
sorry about that, newfag here

There was this guy always alone at the library readning, no one ever talked to him. This was about 15 years ago... I remember him what so ever. i hope he's fine.

Slash his brakes, that way he only will be a menace on the streets one more time for the rest of his life (・∀・)

update: he sideswiped a tree and now the car doesnt run because something is bent into the wheel and he got a citation

GAS GAS GAS

>>4429
Sounds like a skill issue (＾Д^)

i been speeding 230 km/h with my car, retrospective, stupidest thing i ever done. Thats like prison if I get caught.

if u haet pornz and fapping, ur probably on the wrong site ヽ(´ー｀)ノ

>gay sex
meh
>lick[ing] feet
(●ˇ∀ˇ●)

>lick[ing] feet
(´￢`)

>>4994
(´￢`) is a drooling kaomoji...

>>4995
forgive my ignorance, dear... i take it back

>かつこいしい
日本語でおｋ

そうだね

Vidlii was always an eyesore to me, and I always mentioned that. The only good things on there are Heyurian contributions.

I think the rule 8 on vidlii is inevitable, and I also don't think they should just outright ban everything. I think if anything we should post more good content to even things out. But the fact that the video got promoted by the admins of the site, that's what pissed me off
>>5077
>you may remember me from such films as
these are... threads? videos?
I'd like to know why do you think wiby is evil

>>5080
A mix of comments and threads
Wiby isn't actually evil, but it indexes mostly sites that represent everything wrong with the nuWeb. Not, I think, due to deliberate intentions, but because people who are interested in things like wiby submit those kinds of sites for indexing.

We should all band together and send hate on that featured video.

We should all band together and beg kagunya~~ to make a rule 8-based vidlii clone

When we talk about a web revival I think we ought to think a bit more about what specifically we want.

I think a good example of how I wish things could be is something like this article; 'The Dream That Died: The Late 1980s Television Show Reunion Movies' : www.kevinmccorrytv.ca/reunion.html

For one thing, it is about a very niche topic. '80s reunion movies of '70s TV shows. How many people would write about that specific thing? This is the sort of thing that comes out when an author pays no mind to any 'hype-train' or 'pleaseing the algorithm'. It has an 'out-of-left-field' feeling, which is pleasing, like picking a random book off of a library shelf, or stumbling upon a magazine article, and finding yourself surprised as you go from knowing nothing about the topic to feeling fairly well-versed.

Another thing, it's actually well written. It's a proper sort of essay, not some rambling mess with loads of self-effacing apologies sprinkled in about the quality of the writing. It has a point. It starts of as being about a very niche topic, and is explained in such detail that it becomes a generalized cultural review. The writer sprinkles in great insights, about how the landscape of American television changed over the years, how "Television of the 1960s and 1970s had a whimsical, fantastic quality, encouraging viewers to suspend disbelief, to stretch imagination, to use their own discretion in explaining, or in not explaining and just accepting", and how,"In the push for absolute believability and gritty realism, the innocently wondrous quality of the 1960s and 1970s slowly died through the 1980s, and by 1990, it was essentially gone." He leads you thru the history of this period, and it's eventual decline, and finally makes the point that "These reunion movies, though of often dubious imagination, were the last gasp of fanciful television before the realistic mediocrity of the later 1980s and the 1990s conquered the televised airwaves."

Something else that's great is how the author puts information first throughout. There is no, as has been said, "special snowflake delusions on one end and "scandal du jour" on the other", just discussion about the topic at hand. This must seem easy to do while talking about movies and TV shows, but of course, people get serius bizness about everything nowadays. when I read other articles on the Net about entertainment, there are always useless asides into how the main actor is an asshole in real life or how this movie fits into everyone's little political power-games.

This last one is kind of a minor thing, but I like the academic, even-keeled, sort of writing style. Don't get me wrong, I'm fine with a bit of l33tspeak and a bit of rageposting, but nowadays there's way too much of both. The fact is, a lot of people online write exactly like 20-year old girls do. Both grammatically and with the same sort of 'I-am-so-smart' aura of self-satisfaction. The other day I was reading an article where the writer made a critique of the inauthenticity of old comissioned portraits. One thing that kept distracting me was the forced 'conversational' quality of the writing. You've probably encountered it; vapid ineloquence, loads of TMI and overopinionatedness, attempts at humour which always fall flat. The writer in this article kept referring to these portraits as being 'cringe'. Even the art curator/historian they talked to referred to the paintings as 'cringe'. I don't know how they expected me to take them seriously as art critics when they'd go for such lame attempts at being 'hip'.

>When we talk about a web revival I think we ought to think a bit more about what specifically we want.
Agreed. On that topic I think another important aspect is to preserve the quality more so than the content or style, that is to say: don't get hung up on the past and look toward the future. The past is a good guide for what works and doesn't and should enlighten future endeavors, but it's not productive to try to reproduce it per se.

>This is the sort of thing that comes out when an author pays no mind to any 'hype-train' or 'pleaseing the algorithm'. It has an 'out-of-left-field' feeling, which is pleasing, like picking a random book off of a library shelf, or stumbling upon a magazine article, and finding yourself surprised as you go from knowing nothing about the topic to feeling fairly well-versed.
Yes, and I think this is key. Everyone is doing things for clout or money or both, but to play devil's advocate for a second, it's probably a product of the times as well: while the sociopolitical background is one thing that obviously influences people's minds and actions, unfortunately, the other pillar is the economy. Things are harder than ever for just about everyone, economic mobility is at its lowest in a long, long time, and starting with millenials and continuing beyond, it seems that each generation is bound to get less than its predecessors even with far more effort, for the first time since industrialization (and beyond that, the dark ages). Therefore, I believe people are increasingly trying to do their best to "carve out a piece of the pie", and this coupled with the sociopolitical and social media-based environment we're in, has poisoned people's mind and turned them into husks who forgot they are individuals and shouldn't be afraid to be so. Instead of finding themselves, they're busy trying to find a get rich quick scheme under the premise that they can find themselves after that. As a result, the signal to noise ratio on the web has collapsed, but it also has in real life.

>,"In the push for absolute believability and gritty realism, the innocently wondrous quality of the 1960s and 1970s slowly died through the 1980s, and by 1990, it was essentially gone."
Hitchcock said something about this in interviews. Early on he was obsessed with realism as well, but later he realized this was probably a mistake: there's no need to give background reasons for a character to be in the current moment onscreen. You can invent all kinds of reasons for the sake of the film, but it doesn't serve to help engage the viewer or anything like that. So he started dialing down his search for this kind of "perfect realism", if I recall correctly what I read.

>This last one is kind of a minor thing, but I like the academic, even-keeled, sort of writing style. Don't get me wrong, I'm fine with a bit of l33tspeak and a bit of rageposting, but nowadays there's way too much of both. The fact is, a lot of people online write exactly like 20-year old girls do. Both grammatically and with the same sort of 'I-am-so-smart' aura of self-satisfaction
My exact thoughts on this topic.

I think efforts like rule 8 can help purify the userbase, which in turn can purify the minds of those who stick around and use other venues less, because immersion impacts perception. But it's not enough and it's not outlined well enough for a generic framework. In the meantime, for a web renaissance, the key aspect is, of course, creation, but after that there needs to be discoverability. I would also like to propose that another problem is 'archivability' or 'lifespan', but this is better solved with technology than social dynamics, and is probably not urgent/will "solve itself" if the social dynamics are sorted out.

That said I find it hard to more formally described what's needed to achieve the critical point where a web renaissance effort would be able to simply self-sustain and start growing on its own.

Reposting something I posted to Strange World in November 2021:

> (;´Д`) Ayashii is like the wild west in a way, we're all just cowboys settling
> a forgotten frontier, once owned by indi- I mean japanese. We'll make camp 
> and explore these forgotten lands, and learn about the rich history of the
> peoples who once lived in these lands. These strange, strange lands. We're
> in a strange world now..  (´ー`)y-~~

I liken it to the Renaissance - digging through ancient ruins and dusty 
old documents written in foreign languages to discover their ways, all 
in the hopes to find new wisdom, technology, avenues for creativity, 
and bringing about a cultural rebirth after a long and troublesome 
Medieval age where much had been lost or forgotten ヽ(´ー｀)ノ

Let's continue pursuing this "Internet Renaissance" ヽ(´ー｀)ノ

>>5089
>DROP IT
?

9 was the limit before it borked.

The way to fix this is to add a target="_top" attribute to the "Use Frames" link, which will prevent it from opening inside of an existing frame

things never change

>>63898
fixed now

>>63900
Thx kaguya!

how'd you find her account

Heyuri is so lame. Life is so lame in general. OP has a girl's nudes and all of you shitpushers just want to see him pull his dick off... Why are things so difficult these days? I'M JUST TRYING TO GROW UP STRAIGHT!!!!1!11

>>5044
I'm sure that everyone else, like myself, has already reasoned that OP would not post the woman in question out of fear that someone would surely message her and give him away. We in Heyuri's lounge are a clever lot, so we reasoned this out on our own and decided that we should at least attempt to obtain what nudes we could from this man.

>>5049
You give me too much credit
I couldn't care less of the woman's nudes. OP's nudes on the other hand...

(tbh i don't want him to get in trouble to leak the woman's stuff. it's good he didn't post anything yet)

OP here, I don't want to post the pictures because if I ever invite a friend here they will probably recognize the person and would see the video and automatically know its me ヽ(´ー｀)ノ

>>154
この子に似ていそう

ブラは２番

でもおっぱいは何番？

( 'ω')ｳｵｵｵｵｵｵｵｲｱｳｵｵｵｵｵｵｵ!!!!!

私はこの中からは選ばない

A quote link (like >>63863 ) is a quote of a post number that the board software auto-linkifies

A reply is what you're reading rite nao, and they are directed at the OP or a recent reply unless otherwise specified by a quote or quote link

>>63867
it's different from 4chan that's what I want to say

>>63866
Threads exist as static HTML pages (unless you're viewing as a mod or using the live frontend I believe), and they don't get refreshed until something triggers it, such as a new post or something else. This saves us from unnecessary processing on the server every time someone opens a thread

>>63868
This is a different website to 4chan after all - plus there was no such hover message on 4chan until relatively recent times

Behold what happens when you click a post number on Futaba: https://may.2chan.net/b/

Read the rules carefully to find out.

>>62253
>>62268
It's also a thing that only started happening on imageboards in about 2018 or so, I don't see how it's any less a violation of rule 8 than a greentext story (which also includes "misuse of the quoting feature", although that's meant for ">" of course). In fact that seems to be a shoe-in violation of the buzzword clause.
Even more so for
>Like repeating to a poster what he just said to show him how stupid it is.
Which is once again something that only started happening in ~2018 or so and is clearly a misuse of the quoting feature in the greentext story sense.

when it comes to rule 8, I think it makes sense that the same person who would dutifully follow rule 8 on heyuri could also completely ignore it on other sites. it's like how getting drunk is acceptable at a bar or a party, but inappropriate at work or at church. or how it's acceptable to take a dump in the toilet but not in the kitchen. I come to heyuri to engage with certain people in a certain way, and I go to other places to do the same thing in a different way.
I think it's healthy for the internet to have a variety of different spaces with different cultures and expectations, and it's healthy for users to understand those differences and adapt to them. that's not to say that all internet cultures are equal or that all cultures are good and/or desirable. that's a whole other debate that I don't wanna get into now. (;ﾟ∀ﾟ)

that being said, anyone who goes to heyuri to seek sympathy not being able to post rule 8 content on 4chan is a moron. (´ー`)

>>4993
But some behaviors are just unhealthy, even if they are acceptable in some places. Just as you can avoid addictive substances, on the internet you could avoid posting soyjack and other such things, that, just like addictive substances, are just plain unhealthy. I'm not even talking about other parts of teh rule 8, like greentext, but the least I could expect from a heyurian is not engaging in this type of shit and doing his part in making the internet a better place, even if only by a small metric.

>>4993
Also people using teh rule 8 b0rking and reddit/nu4chan type lingo on other sites when talking about Heyuri is less than ideal. You'd expect heyurians to realize that while they are outside talking about our site, they are our representatives in the eyes of the outsiders.

>>4996
>>4997
I think >>4993 also misunderstands a couple of things: people who post rule 8 breaking content aren't just drunk, they're drunkards, and those people sure as hell are drunk at church, too. To get less abstract, it's like the difference between being online and terminally online, or the difference between thinking a picture is funny, and being obsessed with the one picture to the point of not being able to communicate without making everything be about the picture.
Furthermore, it is technically not appropriate to post those on most other imageboards either, it's just not removed because it doesn't technically break a rule and heyuri is one of the only sensible imageboards that understand that you have to do more than enforce the letter of a rule or to be a free speech extremist to get a good community, something that nuCommunities have completely forgotten even though that style of enforcement was the norm in the 2000's. Posting most rule 8 breaking contents outside heyuri is similar to being drunk while working from home: nobody can say 'no' or stop you, most companies won't even say anything about it, but it's seen poorly even if your performance remains good. This is a subtle difference between this and being drunk at work in-person. >>4993 only considers the second case.
Or, perhaps an even more appropriate analogy: it's like farting loudly all the time at work. It's perfectly legal and acceptable as far as the company is concerned, but your co-workers sure as fuck won't appreciate you for it.

Adding on, this is an important distinction because it is unlikely (at least in my opinion) that such a person, even if he shows restraints while here, is able to engage in the local culture properly. Surely this drunkard will rush home as soon as possible to get drunk after attending this anti-alcohol activism meeting, and surely he will never truly understand or participate in anti-alcohol activities (surely this poster goes back to 4chan or s.p or something similar in-between checking out posts here to consume and post things we don't like though it be elsewhere). The point of rule 8 isn't really to block a fixed set of bad contents, it is to foster a good culture/community and it is considered important a proper heyurian is one who does not like that kind of contents for that purpose. However it's obviously not possible to read people's minds or to enforce it at that level, so rule 8 will have to do.

She's probably dead.

>>63842
Seems like OP is sad that Heyurians don't like his post, it's ok OP, you're still a giga faggot! Also:

UU NYAA!! UUUU NYAAA!~~

>>63842
not my post. i just genuinely like these kinda posts. im a sneaky lil salamander, i find the details about heyurizen's real lives to be interesting and would have replied to the thread which couldve probably started a larger convo which couldve probably drawn in others to chime in and contribute to the convo in a way that has happened a million times before if the thread didnt get autosaged.
if people find the thread interesting a conversation will start, if people hate the thread they will shit on it and thats fun too, but if people could simply care less about the post then itll get bumped off the catalog and fade into obscurity the way it should.
the only gripe that i really have is the autosaging. i just think as long as the post isnt breaking any rules then it should be up to the users to decide the post's fate.

>>63855
accidentally linked myself when i was aiming for youuuu >:(

>would have replied to the thread which couldve probably started a larger convo which couldve probably drawn in others to chime in and contribute to the convo in a way that has happened a million times before if the thread didnt get autosaged.
Well thank kamisama it was autosage'd so we didn't have to read all that dreary p00p

>>63856
There's a part I can agree with here: we have visible sage, so it is viable to let the community self-moderate part of the contents to some extent. But even then, some content (see rule 8) should be dealt with harshly, without users getting a say in this, to avoid population drift and other social network dynamics. Though in OP, it's pretty clear the community had already spoken so I don't see the problem with the cull, even if you were to insist the OP is in line with heyuri standards.