>>12603927>it's also more addictive when you can never be held responsible for what you sayI agree There's definitely a chameleon quality on 4chan, and a lot of posters get off on replies and baiting. But on, say, reddit or Imgur there's an equally bad snake quality. on 4chan if someone is posting you can at least take the naive stance of "it's the internet why would they lie." On Imgur and Reddit, say, you can't. If you're seeing a post (at the top) it's because the community is behind it In other words there're no real individuals on Reddit. On 4chan you are who you want, even if that's an asshole. On upvote-downvote websites, you are who others want you to be, even if that's an asshole.
>when /b/ was split into /b/ and /pol/ (for the third time) in 2011This is before my time on here. I'd love to hear more about this, or follow a link to learn if you have one.
>grammarUnderstandable. didn't mean to be an asshole about it, just curious.
>formalityThe post is fairly oral; a lot of it reads like it was transcribed. You can see this in the lack of subordination: you link several clauses with "[...] and [...] so [...] now [...] (even if [...]) [...] [if/then]:. That combined with idiomatic phrases like "being that" give the post a tone of informality, like it was being spoken to someone. But the part I was referencing used the technical, literal sense of 'deny' and 'attribute' in a way that's not super natural for spoken word. However, I now see that you were paralleling the (very literary) definition you greentexted to show that you (by definition) weren't projecting, and I was, indeed, being autistic. That, said there is a tone shift as you enter into the parallelism, and it's sometimes characteristic of non-native speech to come in and out of literary and oral description.
>what's yours? Greek & English
>I thought I was a good speaker until now.Nah you're all good; just didn't read closely enough.
