fchan

discussion

question from a noob. what is rule 34?

Pages:1
1Report
at 7 Aug 2007: 13:28

yeah

2Report (sage)
at 7 Aug 2007: 13:34

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Rule+34

Found as the first result of a google search for 'rule 34', because using the internet is hard. 

3Report
at 7 Aug 2007: 14:13

honestly. rule #34 is bullshit, there cant be porn of everything. 4channers "invented" it.

4Report
at 7 Aug 2007: 14:21

>>3

It's a joke, give yourself a break.

5Report (sage)
at 7 Aug 2007: 14:48

It might've been funny the first time, but it's getting seriously old now. It's now simply used as an attempt to bait some (any) artist into drawing porn about whichever obscure character you happen to like.

Rule 34 fails about 90% of time here. If you want some porn about something that almost nobody else has ever even heard of, you'd better draw it yourself (or commission it).

6Report
at 7 Aug 2007: 17:39

>>3
See rule 35

7Report
at 7 Aug 2007: 17:54

I want to see rule 34 in reverse, that is, clean pictures of a subject that is usually steeped in porn.

8Report
at 7 Aug 2007: 18:26

>>7
see /c/

9Report
at 7 Aug 2007: 18:53

>>8 any Adam Wan, Max Blackrabbit, Dark Nek0gami, Doug Winger etc. in /c/? any pictures of Zigzag? That's what I mean by rule 34 in reverse.

10Report
itoril#e0pMofP/AM at 7 Aug 2007: 22:14

>>7

Would that be rule 43?

11Report
Austin at 8 Aug 2007: 03:25

Although Yes it is hard to find porn of Everything. There is a lot of porn for Almost... Everything.

12Report
at 8 Aug 2007: 08:08

>>10
No, it is the reciprocal (a.k.a. multiplicative inverse), which would be Rule # 1/34.

13Report
at 8 Aug 2007: 12:05

Rules 34 and 35 reign supreme.

14Report
at 8 Aug 2007: 12:36

>>13

i tell ya, it's bullshit made off boredom.

15Report (sage)
at 8 Aug 2007: 13:49

>>13
You obviously didn't see that "There's no ___ porn"-topic in /toon a few weeks ago. Rule 34 failed like 30 times in a row in that topic, before the mods got tired and eliminated it. ;)

16Report
at 8 Aug 2007: 14:20

Ya whatever. All I know Rule 35 has brought us delicious pr0ns of the Zorori chicks, Mathilda, Rita the Fox, Lori Jackrabbit and the new Sonic Racoon chick. Where would I be without it! GO 35!

17Report
at 8 Aug 2007: 14:47

you know you could have posted that link without being a complete dick about it.

I thought it was something strictly associated with fchan, thats why I asked here.

18Report
at 8 Aug 2007: 16:58

>>17
There's like this little circuit in the brains of most of the people who post at forums that completes and forces them to be a dick somehow, no matter how unnecessary it is. And sadly, that isn't strictly associated with Fchan either.

19Report (sage)
at 9 Aug 2007: 00:57

>>18
No, really, I just get tired of children that have an entire world of information at their fingertips, but are too f'n stupid or lazy to look something up before asking someone else to just give them the answer.  Guess it comes from being an old timer who had to look shit up in an actual book if I wanted to learn. 

>>17
I wasn't half the dick I was tempted to be.  Just be glad I respect fchan and Xeno enough to censor my replies according to their rules, or else I might *really* have hurt your precious little feelings. 

If you thought it was fchan only, guess what?  That same little google search would confirm/deny that assumption for you as well.  So why didn't you look for yourself first, again? 

(Don't answer that, it's rhetorical.  Plus, I'm sure the answer would be whiny, and then I'd have to belittle you further for your own good.)

20Report
cartaeon#Gow.qMRUsg at 9 Aug 2007: 04:39

I really hope the "just google it" mentality will eventually go away. I think that can apply to someone wanting to know the ratio of oxygen to nitrogen in the atmosphere, but with questions like this I think it is unfair. I was wondering what this rule 34 business was all about too, I had only seen it on fchan, so my first thought was... surprise... to ask the people that were actually here.

What exactly is the harm in this way rather than asking a search engine? If anything I think it is more harmful to train people to assume that what they find on the first page of google is correct, or that they should trust wikipedia for serious questions. People say you are "lazy" if you don't google it. This is truly hilarious, I think it is entirely the other way around! Going and posting something like this here arguably is much less lazy than throwing it into a search engine and hoping something is there.

People should be kind enough to be open to questions, talking with people, starting some dialogue. Google can't exactly match that. But on the plus side Google doesn't throw a nasty attitude in your face :)

21Report
at 9 Aug 2007: 13:51

>>19
It's not that you were being a spectacular dick or anything, or even that I object to it. Hell, I think if people want to be dicks they should be. I'm more just sitting back and commenting on what I see as prevalent in forum culture. Basically I guess I was being a dick, proudly so.

>>20
I agree with you completely. I also hate the whole mentality of "conversation is dead as long as there are search engines" because I actually find talking to people about stuff to be fun. What I find ironic is that people who say "google it, dumbass" actually take the time to come and post that in response to someone's query. I'd say to them "let it go, dumbass." If someone doesn't want to converse, leave the poster alone so someone else who actually wants to talk to them can do so, instead of being nasty. It's a fucking chat forum, people have a right to come and expect to chat about things.

22Report
Hellfire at 9 Aug 2007: 13:54

>>20
I'm one of those who will tell people to "google it" first, in the case it's a simple question with what should be an obvious answer.  If it's not an obvious answer and a google search would not be extremely likely to turn up the entire answer on the first result, I'd probably take the time to explain to someone.

This is one of those cases where "Have you ever heard of google?" would be an appropriate response.  The "I'm Feeling Lucky" button explains all. ;)

You should count yourself as lucky - at least no one sent you to one of the various /34/ boards without explaining. ;)

23Report (sage)
at 9 Aug 2007: 14:20

>>20
Life isn't fair. 

The 'harm' in asking here is it's a discussion board.  For discussion.  Go google discussion to see why a question-answer exchange isn't discussion.  Every time a new topic is posted, an 'old' topic is bumped off, and even that isn't so bad, except as soon as this 'what is x' question is gone, some other simpleton - like you - who also thinks having to look stuff up for themselves is 'unfair' -boo-fucking-hoo- will ask the same question.  Again. 

And then, if the community at large allows it, and since there's no rule against it, some *other* simpleton will think it's okay to ask his burning question that also has a simplistic, google-found answer that will, like this one, create discussion only tangently, and before you know it this discussion board will be just a 'faq for the retarded and web-search challenged' board instead of the wonderful, happy discussion board it is now. 

tl:dr:  It's a discussion board, not a FAQ board for the inept. 

As for the 'harm' of 'training people to accept everything they find on the first page of google is correct', if people were so easily trained, life would be a whole lot simpler.  Fast food joints would always manage to get the orders right, advertising would unerringly cause people to buy said product, and everyone who ever watched a Bruce Lee film really could do martial arts (or kill aliens with lethal efficiency after a few rounds of Halo). 

And if people are incapable of parsing information to determine what is likely/potentially true and what isn't, then blame the education system for teaching you to be a bunch of lazy morons, rather than teaching you the basics of thinking and learning.  Or maybe blame yourself for not picking it up on your own, because depending on the rest of the universe for everything, and then blaming them for your lack, just makes you look even dumber. 

Think about it, what if everyone here were a bunch of /b/tards who decided it was 'fuck with the n00bs day' and gave you a total bullshit answer to your question?  How long would you be believing that rule 34 stated that "For every 10 shitty porn pics of a character there's bound to be at least 1 good one"?  Then at least asking google would give you enough information to know we were probably just fucking with you. 

tl:dr:  Don't blame your behavior on a lack of education or intelligence.  "I'm an idiot" is not an excuse, it's something you should work to overcome.

Were more than willing to discuss things, 'talking to people, starting some dialogue' (and kudos for spelling that right, since a lot of other folks go with the derivative 'dialog' as 'correct') but "what is this?" and "It is thus" is none of those things.  It's a simple question that needs a simple answer, and this really isn't the place for that.  There's plenty of places for that, such as ask.com and, of course, google. 

Last tl;dr:  Damn, I'm bored today.  :P

24Report
at 9 Aug 2007: 14:29

>>23
*hands you a tube of Preparation H*

For the hurt in your butt. Seriously. Good God.

25Report
at 9 Aug 2007: 14:30

>>23
And feel free to Google Preparation H.

26Report (sage)
at 9 Aug 2007: 14:33

>>21
>>  It's a fucking chat forum, people have a right to come and expect to chat about things.

The reply above applies to you:  Question/answer" does not a discussion/chat make. 

If he had asked about rule 34 as it applies to, say, Grimace and the Fry Guys, then that could be a chat/discussion.  Asking "What's rule 34?" and getting the answer in the first reply, is not discussion.  It can spawn discussion, as this one did - though we're talking about me being a dick, and chat forums in general being mean to the ignorant - which isn't all that related to rule 34. 

27Report (sage)
at 9 Aug 2007: 14:39

>>24
But I like the hurt in my butt.  :(

28Report
at 9 Aug 2007: 14:51

>>26

Poster 21 here.

Yeah, you're right, straight Q&A doesn't make a discussion. And looking back at post one, the way it was made with the question in the topic and just "yeah" as the body does sort of make it hard to defend. I got caught up more in the ideas that were brought up later on, so I would have to exclude you from the dickery label if you were the maker of post 2. Sorry about that.

29Report (sage)
at 10 Aug 2007: 02:56

>>28
It's alright, I fully admit that I was a dick later on in the thread.  No worries. 

30Add Reply
Name Sage? - captcha =
First Page - Last 40 - Entire Thread

Powered by: Shiichan Version 3956
The contents of this page are asserted to be in the public domain by the posters.
The administrators claim no responsibility for thread content.
Manage