>meta game against others
By default, no. The game only exists when people are playing it, and plenty of users are only trying to express themselves, not hog the spotlight.
"Against" is also a loaded word that implies a sort of zero-sum game where some will necessarily lose out on attention if others are better players, which I don't believe to be the case. Time is a finite resource, but that doesn't mean that if two threads are on page 1 and one gets more replies than the other, that the second thread is losing out. It's still on page 1, it has the same level of visibility. If it's not getting attention, it's because it didn't click with others, not because of competition.
As it was discussed in >>98021
, visibility is not the end-all-be-all of activity, you need to have something to dig into. This is the case regardless of any other thread present on a board. You can
go out of your way to optimize your post, but this is ultimately independent of a board's speed. The role of templates is more about being a low-effort starter with wide appeal, contrast this with a front-loaded effortpost that will inherently attract less people due to its more limited scope. You can think of the OP of a general thread as being the endpoint of templates, zero-effort copypasted starters whose creators actively try to not
compete with each other beyond being the first one to make it, and the community limits itself to a single thread at a time. It doesn't actually matter if the one that posted it was you, me, or that other guy over there, the starter is designed to be a space for content and works as a mere container. The OP may feel a sense of pride in being its creator, but no cares. The attention is not his, it's the thread's.
It is, however, possible to make a thread whose intent is to take attention away from something else. It may try to get users to ignore a certain kind of content, as it commonly happens when trying to self-moderate, or using generic threads to obscure a notable one by pushing it down the catalog. In political circles, the latter is called a "slide thread", it exists despite how insane the schizos abusing the label are. But even then, neither is about gaining attention as much as it about depriving others of it. That's not a competition, it's an attack. The scenario where a user analyzes other people's posts and makes optimizes his with the intent of taking away from others is much more marginal than it seems and even in the largest boards it doesn't match the majority of threads made. In general, it's more useful to simply say that they making an effort to craft an attractive thread.>thread creators
Actually applies to all forms of posts, not just replies. See >>98073
.>Or are people just making threads for fun because they want to get input on opinions?
This is a narrow description that leaves out a large chunk of existing posts, such as when a user is too upset to enjoy what they're doing, and isn't looking for any input.