Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 06:35:43 UTC No. 16240647

>>16240629
Whatever is going on, its obviously working since you're crying like a little bitch

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 06:39:54 UTC No. 16240651

>>16240629
You can expect troll and offtopic threads on /sci/ to get bumped for 40+ days.

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 06:42:40 UTC No. 16240655

>>16240651
>You can expect troll and offtopic threads on /sci/ to get bumped for 40+ days.
What's the deal with that bullshit though?

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 06:46:17 UTC No. 16240657

>>16240655
Spam bots and paid click workers doing what they're instructed to do. At this point it's obvious that this is too inorganic to count as "trolling". It's physically impossible to derive satisfaction from such boring and repetitive threads. Whoever pays them just wants to drive users away from this board.

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 07:31:14 UTC No. 16240673

>>16240657
>Spam bots
Do you literally mean an automated posting script? I have a hard time believing that. 4chan's captcha is one of the most complex I've seen online, if not the most complex. How could an automated bot service even beat it?

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 07:36:12 UTC No. 16240676

>>16240629
>FFS, look at these obvious CERN denialist bait threads, three troll threads in a row, WTF is this jannies?
>Are you asleep, what's going on?

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 07:52:38 UTC No. 16240695

>>16240673
Here's something you can try at home, take a screenshot of the captcha and feed it to a bot and see if it can solve it. There are various hybrid models available too where bots make and post the posts but an indian fills out the captchas. Functionally it makes no difference though, something like 70% of all posts are made by a bot or a shill or some such. Does it really matter if the latest shitpost or round of automated bumps was innitiated by a wholly mechanical being or if a robot janny told the jeets that it's time to shitpost again.

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 07:56:35 UTC No. 16240701

>>16240695
>take a screenshot of the captcha and feed it to a bot and see if it can solve it
But it's a dynamically shifted captcha, the slider has to be aligned correctly for the proper characters to display, though this is not always the case, and sometimes it won't even require a captcha at all. Maybe there is a luck factor involved as well, repeatedly attempting to post until the right easy captcha, or the absence of one, comes along.
All else you said, yes, it could be possible.
Some very ignorant, or very malicious, and very rich people are obviously hellbent on preventing scientific knowledge from being divulged.

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 07:58:44 UTC No. 16240703

>>16240701
The bots can solve the sliding ones too with ease. And you don't really have to be very rich, you can buy millions of posts from an indian sweatshop for few thousand bucks. Compared to CIA budget shitting up 4chan is one of their most cost effective operations.

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 08:52:40 UTC No. 16240738

>dude gets fired for browsing /sci/ at work instead of working
>this is obviously the website's fault
>combines captcha solving software somebody else wrote with age-old bump spam tactics

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 09:14:53 UTC No. 16240761

>>16240703
Well, us scientists have to keep on dismantling their efforts with facts, references, and sources then, so is our destiny, it seems. That's the nature of volunteer work sometimes. For me, it's enjoyable.
I just wished jannies would get audited for the quality of their work, because it sure does seem they're in on it as well, just as mentioned here:
>You can expect troll and off-topic threads on /sci/ to get bumped for 40+ days.
>>16240651

So, is this phenomenon intentional or incompetence? Low numbers of Jannies?
Halon's razor would reasonably deduct incompetence, but it's interesting how some threads swiftly get erased off the board (sexually explicit images, for example), while obviously provocative troll bait threads linger on and on.

There seem to be an interest on the jannies' part to induce distrust in science. I hope you're reading this jannies, because I'm calling out your bullshit work results. Yes, I'M ACCUSING YOU of science denialism bias on a science board.

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 09:19:07 UTC No. 16240766

>>16240761
inb4 I get banned.
Save this thread, we have to stop this bullshit.

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 09:20:43 UTC No. 16240767

>>16240761
4chan is owned and operated by glowies. The only reason this website hasn't been taken down yet is because they need /pol/ as a honeypot to keep track of political dissidents who would otherwise hide in the dark web. The other boards are an unnecessary burden to them, so they have an incentive to minimize traffic to those.

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 09:35:07 UTC No. 16240773

>>16240629
I made a thread complaining about the schizo spam the other month and got banned. they ban people like us for complaining yet allow this shit to continue

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 10:29:15 UTC No. 16240817

>>16240773
it's total bullshit indeed:
>>16240761

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 11:23:00 UTC No. 16240870

>>16240629
found the cern physicist

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 11:26:19 UTC No. 16240873

>>16240651
the funniest part of the whinging associated with this sentiment is that if jannies removed all of the threads you felt deserved removal with extreme prejudice, /sci/ traffic would be so low it would be removed as a board within two months. so, in your futile attempt to save /sci/, your end result would be to kill /sci/. just is the plight of the /soi/entist, trying so hard to preserve the sanctity of science that they end up killing it instead. you're a liberal, right? i can tell because of your hypocrisy

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:04:04 UTC No. 16240901

>>16240629
If you're really fed up, Denial of Service attacks are a violation of US law. You could report spam for that and watch jannies run expecting CP. You would get banned instantly but apparently bans don't effect /sci/ posters.

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:16:30 UTC No. 16240916

>>16240873
>it would be removed as a board within two months
that would not be a bad thing

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:17:19 UTC No. 16240920

>>16240873
Retard

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:19:55 UTC No. 16240924

>>16240873
>trying so hard to preserve the sanctity of science
Trolling for emotional triggering is not initiating any type of constructive dialogue, about anything. If these anons truly have doubts or serious skepticism, they can simply ask questions, or propose alternatives.

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:24:51 UTC No. 16240929

>>16240629
Start posting quality threads

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:25:09 UTC No. 16240930

>>16240873
>your end result would be to kill /sci/
Good, it'd be a better result than the current cesspool of trolling and misinformation that it is right now. It actually does more harm than good, as things are.
OP here.

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:26:11 UTC No. 16240932

>>16240929
Some of us are, no doubt.