What is something you like and something you don't like about this thing?

Typical redditor who thinks Veeky Forums never had good discussion and was always about shitposting

Low quality religion debates.

I do.

Typical redditor who thinks Veeky Forums is serious business.

/pol/ and christians

reddit and communists
and meta threads

>dislike
ZERO ambition as a community, needs stickies so that our meme convos can progress, should be leading the historical conmunity in terms of shitposting but is lagging

I dont think well ever see it. Admins never improve anything but their main board.

/ic/ is the last good board here. Admins should be taking setup ideas from 8c

This mindset is why no Veeky Forums board has ever moved beyond freshmen tier humor.

Good humanities are the ones related to history like linguistics, anthropology and archaeology which are actually more interesting than history itself because they tell a story far more interesting than what the people who wrote down history had to tell.

Bad humanities are things like philosophy.

I like lurking and finding out some cool historical event I hadn't heard about . history is so massive, like I didn't know in high school what the fuck Rhodesia was they never spoke about it.

Dislike the /pol/ anal leakage that trickles down here (lots of boards have this problem). I fucking browse pol but shit. Those guys are literal cancer.

Like:
History threads
Dislike:
People who bitch about humanities threads

not likw half this board has a basic grasp of philosophy anyway

Or history, for that matter.

Like-History

Dont like-& Humanities

I just completely don't understand this stance
They go hand in hand like
said, once you exclude philosophy a few pther fields
How can one like history but not the fields that back it up?

Good

Like: Watching smarty/pol/ get assblasted when real /pol/ invades their pseudo-intellectual safe space; art threads

Dislike: alternate history (outside of games, which is /v/ or Veeky Forums anyway); stale memes

Like: comfy threads, polite discussions.
Dislike: uncomfy threads, hostile anons.

i like that we're sympathetic to nazis and aliens.

this place is what would happen if pol and x had a baby but the baby was more legit that the parents because the baby was real and the parents were just ideas.

also, fanta was created by the nazis due to a honey shortage.

+ Some really good threads (recommended reading, library of alexandria, the user doing the spreadsheet)

- When people jump into threads and begin shitposting as a result of having no idea wtf is going on

>Literature & Philosophy

Your thoughts?

Like: Long-winded posts that source their information from places other than wikipedia and thoroughly discuss a subject

dislike:

Religious discussion outside of historical context
De jews posts/ cringeposts from /pol/
One line/sentence posts
People who enter threads to discuss topics they do not understand or have researched whatsoever but formed an opinion of based on a paradox game
People who attempt to explain history with a narrative to reinforce (pol and commies)
"Redpill me on X" tier shit that is actually banned on /pol/ back during the zimmerman trials because it was jargon nonsense
Metathreads irrelevant to both history and humanities, like this one.
And most importantly the fact that the most educated and well thought out discussions are in dead threads.

Like:
>Interesting threads about histroy which really inst discussed in large ammounts in university (especially things like stoneage/prehistory anthropology)
DISLIKES:
>Communism has never been properly tried
>fedora tipping in unrelated threads
>Shitty black nationalist historical revisionism
>claiming that anyone who believes in religion who is a normie conservative socially or economically is automatically a pol-tard
Not that everyone one on Veeky Forums does these things but they are prevalent enough to be annoying

Pros: Really good threads about topics I'm not well versed in and enjoy hearing about
Con: Pol's vacation home

I think the problem most people have is that "Humanities" can be used to justify almost anything being posted. As a result we get really poor threads scarcely related to History or Humanities. It also means that history threads are outnumbered by humanities threads, despite history being the primary purpose of the board.

>the sherman isn't on fire
meme harder friend

>What is something you like
History
>and something you don't like about this thing?
Humanities

>tfw humanities will never be kicked out
can'twe just make a separate humanities board or shove it into /pol/ considering the 'humanities' part is usually used as an excuse to smuggle in /pol/ topics?

>like
When we actually discuss history
>dislike
When /pol/ or /leftypol/ comes and shitposts

At first I thought the anti-humanities people were wrong but now I think they are right.

All the good posts are historical, all the shitposts are humanities.

This mostly. I don’t even hate humanities, but the quality is terrible.

Historic threads are usually informative and interesting. And when it comes about funposting, it's mostly friendly jokes about events/historical figures/civilizations and not about attacking other anons.

Humanities threads in another hand are logical fallacies incarnated. You rarely see debates with well-structured arguments. It's impossible to have a good discussion without shitposting, spamming pastas, derailing and baiting. You can't even discuss religion without other sects autisticaly screeching and saging it to death.

Like:
>For the most part interesting and informative
threads
>Some high quality history memes
Dislike:
>Religious LARPing
>Idiots from /pol/
>Chauvinists

People who learn about something for the first time in a thread and then pontificate about it based on what was in the thread.

Example: Garbo is apparently the greatest spy who ever lived, because that's how he was described in a thread last week. Disregard that he's famous for explicitly NOT being a spy of any kind and for having the balls to send the Germans information he had made up, mixed with real information the British government GAVE him to boost his credibility.

Like: When we actually discus history topics that enlighten us.

Dislike: How someday 3/5 of post are shitposts about commies.

I also like it when I spell 'discuss' correctly...

>like
People with a basic scientific background that argue rationally about humanitarian topics without exclusively falling back on biological reductionism like it is the case on Veeky Forums.
>dislike
Historians, religious nuts and """"philosophers"""" with no grasp of basic rhetoric and reasoning whose entire posting history consists of nothing but ad hominems and non sequitors.

>hate
Mods and janitards who do it for free and delete threads with triple digit replies and an ongoing discussion because some faggot complained that the thread is supposedly off topic.

reddit invasions

>Idiots from /pol/
>Chauvinists
I mean, you could say that about just about any board here

This. I gave up on this place when I first created a good quality thread discussing the effects on religious communities by Urbanization do to the Market Revolutions; how technology, politics, and topography might have played a role in forming new religious movements (such as Mormonism).

I thought it was a fuck little thread. I put a lot of effort into dropping primary source material. However, the thread died quickly with only 3 replies.

Veeky Forums is a reddit colony which explains alot, shitty bants, full of virtue signaling and apologists and fedora untermench that complains about "muh serious threads"

What if humanities treads are so shit because historians shit them up. Because historians have no clue how to create a logical argument and all they do is recite things they read somewhere else. It's even common practice to refer to Wikipedia.

But really your opinion is confirmation bias at it's finest. You probably don't even look into most humanities threads and just open the ones that have 200+ replies, which are obviously those with the most bait and shitposting in them. When I open the first history thread in the catalog with 200+ replies right now it's nothing but racebaiting as well. But please tell me how it's informative and interesting to talk about the IQ of africans for the 10.000th time.
>funposting
Reminder that ironic shitposting is shitposting.

I like the History.

I dislike the & Humanities.

/pol/ threads. Don't get me wrong, I love /pol/, but if I come to Veeky Forums, I don't want to see /pol/ threads.

>Like
The opportunity to talk casually about anything from Nietzsche to earth history.
>Dislike
The degenerates who have major complaints about it yet still come here and shit up the place with their pessimism (and resentment, in the case of anti-humanities).

I enjoy watching newfag tryhards from /pol/, /leftypol/, Veeky Forums ect come here and try to shill their meme ideologies and then get utterly #rekt

all their beliefs rely upon made up meme revisionist history

>like Nietzsche
>dislike pessimism
autism

purple, green and red are all right though

t. jew

...

hmmm.......

The start of his mature period (Human, All Too Human) is a recuperation from pessimism. He says so explicitly.

You are like the people who think he is a nihilist, you clearly haven't read his works.

>smarty/pol/ get assblasted when real /pol/ invades their pseudo-intellectual safe space
can you explain better i have no clue what you mean

Like
Threads that stay on topic and don't just divulge into shit flinging
Historical pic threads
Dislike
Stirnerposters
Commies
Shitposting Pol posters
Shit flinging
Christain larpers

>Like
Threads about topics I had little knowledge about, e.g. lesser known historical events
>Dislike
The 50 WWII topics a day
>/pol/ invasion

>like

A lot here have genuinely good discussion

>dislike

Marxist fanboys common in humanities departments in real life, along with smacks of SJW thought

Dumb theory

Yeah, I understand. Once made a thread on /g/ about how Java Server Pages might be better than PHP under certain circumstances. Provided reading material and benchmark test. After 30 min or so I had only 5 replies and then it archived.

But if you just post fuck al niggers on /pol/ or macbooks are for fags on /g/ you will get a massive shit storm and the thread will be alive next day if it didn't hit the bump limit.

It's more of a problem for this whole site. Not just this board. It's filled with filth. But what do you expect from a place like this that attract societies outcasts. There is a reason they are here.

But to get back at OP. I would like to see more discussion about humanities. All I see is history.

Stirner spook posting is getting out of hand.

I really like the high quality niche history-related memes

I dislike blantant shitposting and the
>humanities
part

Like: Sometimes nice objective discussions about historical events

Dislike: pole and frenchboos and le funny HRE meme

Funposting can be fun
But it's nothing but funposting and it has to stop

>Like:
History, Humanities when done well, threads that can use historical information to understand the current day
>Dislike:
/pol/ and authoritarian apologists
/leftypol/ and communist apologists
Absolutes
Poorly structured threads
Threads dedicated to Veeky Forums memes
(x)aboos

>confirmation bias is a dumb theory
Historians everyone.