Maternally.

Oh no, someone is going to be VERY upset at that thin Yuno!
I just woke up so my mind is a bit foggy and unmotivated, but the gist of things is that once upon a time /qa/ was a good board (2015) and then it became a bad board (late 2015-2016) and then through some communal cleaning, bots, the power of positive thinking and people switching from "why does 4chan suck" to "let's instead make /qa/ our version of a good 4chan" it became a good board again in early 2017 with a strange "retirement home" like atmosphere combined with chaos. It ended up with a 2D/Random (nijiura) flare because it seemed to be unifying interest of people there (/jp/-aligned people love meta it turns out). Then in 2019 it became a bad board again when mods decided to flex their muscle for the final time and went nuclear with rangebans, even against people that were merely regular posters posting stuff that simply wasn't the new type of /qa/ they envisioned.
Long story short, this is the older /qa/ that most people don't actually know about. I guess I typed more than I thought I would.

um erm uhhh lurk moar fag :3

>>122309
This is missing the stuff that happened afterwards though. We stayed there for three more years and finally moved to kissu once the mods started going full hotpockets and deleting/banning a lot of things at random and rangebanning posters. We don't have anything to do with the soyjak spamming vultures that came afterwards and caused its closure. So it has been 4 years since we started using kissu.

>>122309
This was my first post on Kissu.

>>154663
I also posted yuno in my first post.

>>122314
Interesting, makes me understand the hate for old s*s that one anon had and believe in the justice of it being dead. The only thing here that has me shocked is that a supposed "Avatarfag era" is being referred to as something seemingly positive.

Little known fact, but Kissu is an accidental byproduct of the 4chan-4channel split: hiroyuki's attempt to sanitize blue boards got mobile data providers rangebanned all over the world, and a chunk of the original kissu userbase got hit

>>154665
That pic's mostly wrong, made as unironic revisionism from the days proto-kissu was trying to justify an aggressive take over of /qa/ and declare it 2D/random. The writer has the general gist of old /qa/ but knew little about it's relationship with [s4s], because they conflated Swaglord's attentionwhoring with [s4s] culture. Some of /qa/'s oldest regulars were from there.

Here's the autismo bag of /qa/ history

https://wiki.bibanon.org/4chan/Chronicle/qa
https://wiki.bibanon.org/4chan/History/qa

>>154747
https://wiki.bibanon.org/index.php?title=4chan/Chronicle/qa&action=history
Personally, I feel like a wiki page written years after the fact by a single person, who wasn't around for the /qa/ lockdown in 2017 and is clueless about ghost boards and /jp/ spinoffs, is more likely to be revisionism. That image meanwhile has been posted and discussed dozens of times over the years.

>>154749
And it's been called a revisionist piece since it was first posted, practically all times it was posted. As evidenced in the desuarchive citations.

>>154749
If you wanna dissect the pic to prove it's validity, we can. Consider the "+60 images" mosaic. That's pic rel and from 2013.

But the real crux of the matter is pretending the 2D threads were an organic response from locals and not heavily resisted. That's an open lie, there even was a general dedicated to bragging about the takeover.

It's really not something worth discussing. It's 8 years ago now. I certainly don't have the motivation to retread things 50 more times. Did it far, far too many times back on 4/qa/ and it's time and energy wasted.

>>154750
>And it's been called a revisionist piece since it was first posted
How is this an indictment? The fact that people were able to freely voice objections against it on the very board that it pertains to, mere weeks or months after it was made, is a good thing.
>practically all times it was posted
I remember several people agreeing with it, sometimes begrudgingly. I'm sure you can find these posts on desuarchive too.

>>154751
>If you wanna dissect the pic to prove it's validity
No, not really. I didn't make the image, I don't think I even have it saved, and I'm afraid I don't care enough about it to try to construct arguments in its favor using out of context archive posts from 8 years ago.
>But the real crux of the matter is pretending the 2D threads were an organic response from locals and not heavily resisted.
The thing is that there was never a consensus among the "locals" about anything. What you had was different, unrelated posters and/or factions who had different visions for what the board should be. It's pointless to try to claim this wide umbrella approved or disapproved of something. Speaking for myself, I was a "local" who used /qa/ on and off from its creation, mostly for meta discussion about other boards that I browsed. For example, I'm sure it would be easy to find archived posts I made in /a/ and /jp/ meta threads. From early 2017 onward I almost exclusively posted "2D/Random" content, simply because I noticed there was a surge in this type of content and decided to join in. I know for a fact there were other posters like me, from conversations I had with them and from noticing posting habits. I also know that some of the people who complained about our posts must have been other /qa/ locals, but frankly, I didn't really care. Why should I?

>>154754
>How is this an indictment?
How is (i presume) your statement "The writer has one shaky affirmation on his 6 digit long citated research paper, nothing he says can be trusted" an indictment either?

>I also know that some of the people who complained about our posts must have been other /qa/ locals, but frankly, I didn't really care. Why should I?
That is fair, but you are basically admitting that there was a faction with an active agenda who the pic represents. What stops you from acknowledging the information is biased and warning the anon?

> It's pointless to try to claim this wide umbrella approved or disapproved of something.
Well, context matters. Before different little groups could mingle in their corners undisturbed, /qa/ had the extra space for it. What would they think when a single group decided to occupy every single corner?

Arguing the trustworthiness of the article is frankly moot. You can conclusively refute either image or article by checking the sources, /qa/ is archived in full after all and the later has some 1200 of them.
There's something to say about "out of context archive" posts. One post, maybe we could argue that. over 20 citations of variations on the same discussions, spread in a period of several months. It's disingenuous to call that out of context.

>>154756
Actually the intent of my statement is closer to "The article was written by a single person, years after the facts he's narrating, and based on anonymous archive posts. This person also demonstrates a clear lack of knowledge about topics that were discussed several times (at the time) and were very easily verifiable (at the time.) Thus, I would take its contents with a grain of salt, as they're likely to contain revisionism." I'm not arguing in favor of that other image, though again, it does have the benefit of having been made, shared and discussed when it was actually relevant. I'm not talking about the whole article either, as I didn't read it and a lot of it is of no interest to me since I took a long break from posting on /qa/ and imageboards in general in around 2018 due to moving countries. I'll admit I'm clueless about most of what transpired after that, like the whole soy shit. I couldn't argue against what the article says about that even if I wanted to.
>you are basically admitting that there was a faction with an active agenda
Eh, I don't really see it that way because for me it wasn't about working towards a goal. The 2D funposting was the goal in itself, and as soon as there was an audience for that the goal was already achieved.
>What would they think when a single group decided to occupy every single corner?
I liked it, because I was part of said group and there was still room for other topics of my interest like happenings and discussions about other imageboards.
>It's disingenuous to call that out of context.
I mean that there's a lot of context you would have missed even at the time if you were just browsing /qa/ on 4chan and taking posts at face value, unaware of things like e.g. ghost boards. Let alone trawling through the /qa/ archive years later.
>moot
Literally who?

>>154757
>This person also demonstrates a clear lack of knowledge about topics that were discussed several times (at the time) and were very easily verifiable (at the time.)
Only criticism I've seen you make is regarding the name warosu. It's explicitly stated it's adopted for lack of a better name, as the hangouts (I presume IRC or somesuch) of the original 2D gang are unknown and the only culture they seemed to admire to was ghost era /jp/.

If your argument is "it doesn't pass the bar for this non-/qa/ imageboard so i won't believe anything it says", it seems more like a convenient excuse than a tangible argument.

You may disagree with what the originators of 2D/Random identified as, but you can always approach the writer and suggest an alternative term if you can point to evidence.

>>154757
>I mean that there's a lot of context you would have missed even at the time if you were just browsing /qa/ on 4chan and taking posts at face value, unaware of things like e.g. ghost boards.
As for this: /qa/ghost is cited there too, and there's snippets from relevant IRCs and more. Besides, desu ghost was only good for the 2D gang until #qa was made.

If you meant to say "my group communicated elsewhere and /qa/ never found out", well, I'm all ears~

>>154663
>>154664
I wish I was cool enough to post Yuno.

Must not get sucked back into meta...
I think the main issue is that you ascribe an organized campaign that came as a group and not people that arrived over time. The closest thing to people coming as a group would be people from ota or other spinoffs, but that's like a dozen people and they didn't seem to last very long. Quite likely a few crazies came from there, though.
Offboard stuff coalesced when it became necessary, which was the /mlpol/8gag raid that eventually made posting on 4/qa/ impossible with the board lock. #qa sageru was made as a result. It wasn't a "heh, we must contintue to pull the strings as puppetmasters" but "I think our board is dead let's stay in touch".
As I said earlier I don't have the motivation to discuss this stuff much any more. The back and forth "this is what happened" "No it didn't" "yes it did" "no it didn't "yes it did" "no it didn't" is a malignant type of internet discussion that is best left with the corpse of 4/qa/.

>>154793
>I think the main issue is that you ascribe an organized campaign that came as a group
Let's just say that with the context I have at hand, the presence of an organized effort on /qa/ is hard to deny. Maybe it was just 3 people, but it was 3 people coordinating with scripts.

But here's the kicker: I believe it's both.

Ethical or not they ran a pretty successful campaign and by the time #qa first happened there were noticed by people from all over the /jp/sphere and 4chan. Effectively managed to create a spinoff oriented community when it was then believed new spinoffs are always D.O.A.
I'd cite their story as the most concise proof that when it comes to community making, making (carefully curated) noise just works. We may argue it's accidental, but well, let the story of the process serve as a guideline for future generations. Like the Discord that popularized 'jaks doing the same thing. Funny how things work.

>>154767
Huh? I haven't said anything about Warosu.
>the hangouts (I presume IRC or somesuch) of the original 2D gang are unknown
I just had the wildest idea. But... nah, there's no way. Never mind.
>you can always approach the writer and suggest an alternative term
That would require me having any interest in contributing to this sort of hagiography, which I don't, and (as should be clear already) especially not years after the facts.

>>154769
>desu ghost was only good for the 2D gang until #qa was made
Actually we still continued to use /ghost/ and /meta/ for several months after that. Speaking of which, one thing I always found bizarre was how we were practically the only ones there at that time. You'd think any /qa/ regular would be well aware of ghost boards.
>If you meant to say "my group communicated elsewhere and /qa/ never found out", well, I'm all ears~
For free? Come on now. I'll need a minimum of $5000 before I start leaking the actual juicy intel.

>>154849
>Speaking of which, one thing I always found bizarre was how we were practically the only ones there at that time.
Ghostposting only starts when posters knows they are liable to get banned and know there's fellow shitposters on the prow.
Otherwise it's a QoL nightmare. The only people actively using ghostposting on most boards are literal schizophrenics who think every single post is talking to them. See: He who hates crackships

Yunocchi's re-widening surgery was a great success! Everyone wish her a speedy recovery!

>>154874
denser yunocchi

>>154874
could we maybe also please get her in ultra-widescreen so she's suitable for theatres everywhere this summer

>>154886
Beautiful...