File: f.swf-(33 KB, 640x360, Loop)
[_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)12:05:00 No.3148202
Is /f/ getting slower?
I know from reading some archived threads that around 2010 some threads at least would stay up
for a few days at a time, will it ever be like that again?
Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)12:07:23 No.3148203
>>3148202
>around 2010 some threads at least would stay up for a few days at a time
link to said threads?
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)12:18:32 No.3148207
Upon closer inspection I was mixing up the ended and checked time in the swfchan archive. False
alarm.
>> [_] !7l777777.g 09/14/16(Wed)13:04:45 No.3148215
>>3148202
/f/ has always been a really slow board
but at least its not as slow as /i/ or /po/ threads on there can last over a month with barely
any replies
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)13:16:47 No.3148217
>>3148215
Well I browse /t/ sometimes too and quite a few threads last over half a year and a few are even
over the year mark.
I don't consider /f/ to be slow, I've never once seen a thread go to 24 hours.
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)13:31:25 No.3148221
>>3148202
Hopefully.
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)13:37:53 No.3148227
>>3148217
Actually the average /f/ anon post lame shit like daily dose, chinese trumpet or Takeo Ischi;
it's obvious that a thread can't go over 24 hours.
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)13:56:43 No.3148233
>>3148215
our threads on /i/ last around 6 months, and they almost never hit bump limit.
/po/'s oldest 2 threads are 730 and 348 days old.
/i/'s are 990 and 796.
/f/ will never be as slow as /i/
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)14:13:06 No.3148240
I find that /f/ moves at a constant pace, I can reliably come on every hour and see roughly half
the board is new(well as new as /f/ gets anyway) sometimes it being all different.
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)14:37:36 No.3148248
>>3148233
Huh, you always hear about /po/ being the slowest. It might just be the slowest in general.
While /t/'s two oldest threads are 1312 (not hit bump limit) and 978 (hit limit) days old, there
are always new threads made every couple of days and about half the threads have a reply within
the last 2 days.
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)14:40:22 No.3148250
and don't forget about the archives
how do archives actually work? how long are threads gonna stay there? is there a limit to how
many there can be?
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)15:15:41 No.3148262
>>3148217
Mods mark and delete threads before that happens usually
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)15:31:10 No.3148271
>>3148202
i dunno but i liked when threads stayed up 12 hours at least. i think /f/ has slowed down a bit
lately but it's still faster than before
>>3148203
just browse swfchan a bit
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)15:33:21 No.3148274
>>3148262
>Mods mark and delete threads
If it were against the rules, such as advertising or CP sure. Usually they are pruned because a
new thread is posted, which happens automatically.
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)15:40:17 No.3148279
>>3148250
the "4chan archives" are updated manually and stopped being updated when moot stopped caring
about flash (around 2008 or something). they are pretty much static.
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)15:50:22 No.3148283
>>3148279
I meant the other archives like here
http://boards.4chan.org/t/archive
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)15:55:59 No.3148287
>>3148283
Those are automatic, last for a week and seem to have no limit, take a look here at the number of
threads archived from /pol/ in the last week. http://boards.4chan.org/pol/archive
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)16:04:48 No.3148288
>>3148287
holy shit somebody stop them
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)17:00:00 No.3148308
>>3148287
fuck! didn't expect /pol/ to have that many. more than /v/.
wonder how many /b/ have per 7 days.
>>3148274
/f/ is the only board that still have the old "marked for deletion (old)" system, we're very
special!
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)17:18:51 No.3148317
>>3148308
>/f/ is the only board that still have the old "marked for deletion (old)" system, we're very
special!
I knew that, does it have a name though? Thought it was called pruning or something.
/b/ doesn't have an archive because of the huge volume of posts, probably over 50 thousand.
>>3148279
Here I posted >>>/qa/669935 since Hiro was spotted in a thread recently there. Discuss /f/ with a
chance that he'll read it at least.
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)17:50:00 No.3148329
ALLOW WEBMS WITH SOUND ON /F/
THE ENTIRE BOARD IS JUST "HEY LISTEN TO MY SONG WITH THIS REPEATING GIF" VERY FUCKING TIME
WHATS THE FUCKING POINT ANYMORE.
I DONT WANT TO SEE YOUR FUCKING RAINY DAY GIF WITH SHITTY MUSIC WHILE A CUP OF COFFEE IS ON THE
TABLE YOU FUCKING ASSHOLE.
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)17:51:45 No.3148330
ree
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)17:51:57 No.3148331
>>3148329
See >>3148277
made in flash, not a gif.
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)17:52:35 No.3148332
i love this awful sounding tone, anyone got sauce?
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)17:54:12 No.3148333
>>3148331
I mean yeah there's still gonna be .swf files allowed, but there's no point in making a GIF and
adding a song and converting it into a shitty 200x140 sized .swf file
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)17:56:07 No.3148334
>>3148333
Nah, you'd probably want to allow replys with said webm's as well, might as well turn /f/ into an
imageboard at that point.
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)17:57:16 No.3148336
>>3148334
no, there's posts on here which are just ceonverted youtube videos, that would honestly help with
making the videosat least viewable in something higher than 640x480 with massive amounts of
pixelization.
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)18:03:39 No.3148339
>>3148215
>/i/ or /po/ threads on there can last over a month with barely any replies
They have ten pages of threads; /f/ would be just as slow if we had as many possible threads as
every other board.
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)18:10:48 No.3148344
>>3148336
Really? Well put your webm's to the test by posting the whole tron movie into a webm. swf can do
anything a webm can do but better.
>> [_] Anonymous 09/14/16(Wed)18:43:24 No.3148364
>>3148329
>>3148333
If you're complaining about the content of the flashes, then vie for stricter moderation of shit
content, not open up a way for even more garbage to flood the board.
