>Scientifically speaking, [bullshit that has nothing to do with science]>Politics thread>Religion thread>/x/-tier threadScientifically speaking, who keeps spamming shitty threads, raiding good ones, making moronic arguments, lacking basic knowledge of reality that any first-year has, and generally trying to turn /sci/ into yet another brainlet & schizo board?Who stands to gain from ruining /sci/? Why would someone want to destroy our board?
>>16816537I really think some people out there hate 4chan and want to destroy it by making it boring to use
Why are those integral symbols sideways?
>>16816537mais qui?
>>16816604One of them is drunk.The double integrals are spooning, however.
>>16816537>Scientifically speaking, who keeps spamming shitty threads, raiding good ones, making moronic arguments, lacking basic knowledge of reality that any first-year has, and generally trying to turn /sci/ into yet another brainlet & schizo board?The average 4channer. If this site has ever been the hideout of genious savants, it was a long time ago.Moreover I would argue that most real scientists or anyway people actually studying scientific stuff or working on it have a more "normie" timetable of life, while schizos and pseuds have all the time in the world to shit the catalog with uncomprehensible bullshit or with the unrefutable proof of creationism (this time for real libtards).Sage and try to talk about stuff you like. They aren't going away unfortunately. The high they feel to see 300 (You)s to their posts is too high.
>>16816674I mean, if the moderation did their job that'd be awesome. If there's something I've learned from a dead bord is that page 1 rules, and they own it. Just saying.
>>16816651Ahh, thank you for explaining.I take it triple integrals in the horizontal position are nsfw and hence not shown.
>>16817168Built for 3DC.(Three dimentional calculus)
