Hello 4chan. I have spent the past 2 years conducting a study on 4chan's international board (/int/). You see it is commonely stated that /int/'s moderation is extremely biased, specifically when it comes to anything regarding Russia. I wanted to test this to see if this was actually true.I made threads on /int/ (N=50) using various proxies. (https://pastebin.com/XfwT4zXR) Each thread would be made in a pair. One would be would negative about Russia, the other would contain the near exact same wording except instead of Russia it would be about another country. I would then record if the thread was deleted and how long it would take to be deleted (in minutes). What I found was shocking even for me. 88.5% of threads negative about Russia were deleted while only 11.5% of threads negative about other countries were deleted. The median time of deletion for Russian threads were 4 minutes with the longest time being 5 hours and 19 minutes and the shortest time being 4.5 seconds (which was so fast the archive sites weren't able to archive it in time so it had to be thrown out). The confidence scores in the graph were calculated using Wilson score with a 95% confidence interval.Under normal circumstances a sample size of 50 would be considered too small to be statistical significant or publishable but due to the immense and frankly shocking difference in outcomes it was able to more than overcome this and is provably statistical significant. On a scientific level the moderation of this board is biased. If this bias continues I will try to publish this as a pilot study in JOTS
Here is an example of the typical thread I would make. Here the wording is the same with the only difference being the flag shown. Other times the wording would be changed from "Russia" to another country or similar other adjustments. Most cases would result in the Russian thread being deleted and the other country's staying up with 0 instances of the reverse happening.
>>16969434>those error barsSI garbage.
>>16969434Kek. based. Fuck jannies.
>>16969434How did Russians infiltrate the jannie team or is that no one besides a slav would be willing to clean it up for free?
>>16969444Easily>Hi here is an email to the mod team saying I want to be a jannie, please give jannie blyak I promise to not be biased Chiki briki
>>16969435Russians are more likely to report the thread because they're insecure about their sexuality
>>16969472You would have a point if the threads weren't deleted in seconds
>>16969434If you spam any garbage thread it starts to get disproportionally deleted. We have several schizo spammers here that get their threads deleted asap (when ever moderation isn't out of hot pockets so once a week or so) about nominally innocent topics but because they are fairly obvious spamming they get removed. No one cares that a DRC makes a thread how CAR people are gay retards because that's fairly obviously one time happening by a seether frankly it's even quaint. Meanwhile when you deliberately spam something especially something like Russia spam then you are obviously shitposter, you aren't doing that organically so your stuff gets deleted.You could repeat the "experiment" with anything and get the same result, the fact that you started out with a divisive topic just kinda proves that you were doing it in bad faith to start out with which further makes the thing obvious and incentivizes deletion quickly, if you whined about Nepal you could have continued doing so for much longer before mods catch on to you because with Russia you are just doing what other paid spammers are already doing.
>If you spam any garbage thread it starts to get disproportionally deleted. We have several schizo spammers here that get their threads deleted asap (when ever moderation isn't out of hot pockets so once a week or so) about nominally innocent topics but because they are fairly obvious spamming they get removed. No one cares that a DRC makes a thread how CAR people are gay retards because that's fairly obviously one time happening by a seether frankly it's even quaint. Meanwhile when you deliberately spam something especially something like Russia spam then you are obviously shitposter, you aren't doing that organically so your stuff gets deleted.>You could repeat the "experiment" with anything and get the same result, the fact that you started out with a divisive topic just kinda proves that you were doing it in bad faith to start out with which further makes the thing obvious and incentivizes deletion quickly, if you whined about Nepal you could have continued doing so for much longer before mods catch on to you because with Russia you are just doing what other paid spammers are already doing.
>>1696947725 Russian threads all with a different pictures, subjects and wording over the course of 2.5 years isn't spam. That is literally less than 1 Russian thread a month on a different topic. Are you pretending to be retarded to defend the jannies?
>>16969481It is when there's hundreds of threads a week by actual spammers. You are just catching strays by spamming with other spammers, it doesn't mean it's not spam and that it shouldn't be deleted.
>>16969482>It's spam if you say you don't like a thing I like but not spam if I don't like the thingAmerica and India get 10x the hate threads Russia gets. Nice try Jannie.
>>16969434>using various proxiesKek. Your threads were deleted because they were spam, and you aren't the only one who's been spamming them, so you got caught in the crossfire with the other seething spammers. N=50 is insignificant given /int/'s traffic. You wasted 2 years trying to prove you're a victim against the mean Russian janny boogeyman. This isn't science or math related. This is a meta thread, about another fucking board. Kill yourself and go back to >>>/b/ and >>>/trash/.An actual thread died for this.
>>16969482Russia doesn't get any more hate than any other country. China, India, Portugal, UK, USA, ect get far more.
>>16969487see >>16969485Not doing a good job defending yourself Jannie
>>16969491I don't suppose you have the numbers to back that claim up.
>>16969487>>16969477>It's spam when it is Russia but not spam when it is other countries because fuck you Russia number 1!
>>16969495Searching for posts that contain ‘Russia’ and that are only OP posts and posts after 2023-01-01. Returning only first 5000 of 14552 results found.Searching for posts that contain ‘America’ and that are only OP posts and posts after 2023-01-01. Returning only first 5000 of 29108 results found.
>>16969504Searching for posts that contain ‘China’ and that are only OP posts and posts after 2023-01-01. Returning only first 5000 of 15001 results found.Searching for posts that contain ‘Japan’ and that are only OP posts and posts after 2023-01-01. Returning only first 5000 of 21874 results found.
>>16969507Searching for posts that contain ‘Jeet’ and that are only OP posts and posts after 2023-01-01. 1255 results found.What is a word that is derogatory towards Russians so I can compare how many threads directly insult Indians vs Russians?
>>16969510I think I found itSearching for posts that contain ‘Vatnik’ and that are only OP posts and posts after 2023-01-01. 56 results found.Searching for posts that contain ‘Orc’ and that are only OP posts and posts after 2023-01-01. 93 results found.Searching for posts that contain ‘Ivan’ and that are only OP posts and posts after 2023-01-01. 261 results found.So total combined far less than Jeet and that is being kind since Ivan isn't necessarily an insult.
>>16969487>N=50 is insignificant given /int/'s traffic.That isn't how statistics works. It wouldn't matter if the board was /b/ or /po/.
>>16969434you are doing gods work anon, the amount of lakhta pidor shills on all boards (especially those inclined towards culture/politics) is unbearable
>>16969498Spam is spam. Learn to behave and your abhorrent threads won't get deleted. Stop trying to victimize yourself.>>16969504>>16969507>>16969510>>16969512Did you tally:>spelling mistakes>filter evasion>alternate terms>using OP image instead of textAnd of those threads that you did count, after discarding rule breaking threads, how many were deleted because of hurt fee-fees?How about thread count before 2023?>>16969514It is how it works if its relevant to your testing environment. And even if it wasn't, the threads aren't a representative sample. Shit posting, especially on int, is a lot more methodical than "[country name] [bad|gay|cringe|reddit]".
>>16969515Thanks. I will next do a study but about videogame consoles on /v/ (Sony, Nintendo Microsoft)
>>16969517>Spam is spamUnless it insults a country that isn't Russia. You aren't very good at arguing your point Jannie.>Did you tally:>>spelling mistakes>>filter evasion>>alternate terms>>using OP image instead of textThis is levels of cope even real actual published studies probably wouldn't bother with. There would be no reason to assume Russia is spelled more than India. What a retarded comment. Not OP but you are clearly a seething Jannie or a Russian.
>>16969517>Did you think about the fact "Woman" is longer than the word "Man" in your study? Type cope.
>>16969517>It is how it works if its relevant to your testing environment. And even if it wasn't, the threads aren't a representative sample.They are. You clearly don't know stats. If a board has 1 million posts vs 100 million wouldn't change this. You aren't a /sci/fag but a coping Jannie from another board seething that you got caught. By your logic any study on Indians would need 100 times a bigger sample size than any study on Irish. That isn't how it works.
>mfw I posted these OP pics on /int/ and got instabanned>mfw the tranny shitskin janny scurried quickly like a roach to (poorly) defend his izzat hereyou can't make this shit up lmfao OP is NOT a faggot, jannie on the other hand is the biggest faggot in the observable universe lel
>>16969533Yep. Full damage control. He doesn't want to get demoted
>>16969549the retard is now camping in the thread and instadeleting my posts so fast that they don't even get archived, never forget that these subhumans do it for free lel I'm going to report him to his superiors btw, you should also send your findings to higher instances
>camping in the thread and instadeleting my posts so fast that they don't even get archived
>>16969566I 100% a 4chan Janitor would do this. Who else would be this pathetic?
>>16969434bump, thanks for your research anon, such roots a firm quantitative grounds in assessing the extend of mod and sys admin infiltration permeating the net.Would you recommend a chan design where users can pic their own mod teams?
>>169695818ch already did it. Anyone could make their own board and mod it. Someone made a /pol/ but the mods were too biased so someone made a 2nd /pol/ and then everyone migrated to that one.
>>16969475Maybe the moderator is a sexually frustrated russian? I wouldn't be surprised is this website is a russian psyop.
>>16969517>he's putting this much effort into obviously arguing in bad faith trying to convince people OP is not onto somethingOk so far this is the best evidence in favor of OP's conclusion
>>16969556>I'm going to report him to his superiors btw, you should also send your findings to higher instanceshuh? you cant report jannies or mods in any way for the last who known how many years.that's why there's so much horseshit being pulled by mods now
>>16969566happens on /sp/ toothere's one mod there that deletes everything he doesn't like regardless if it's on topic or not
>>16969614It is pretty clear this is the jannie (or is it spelled janny?) in question and doesn't want to lose his position.
>>16969434you should tag gaped ape on twitter with this
>>16969635>gaped ape on twitterWho? Literally whomst?
>>16969635I searched this expecting either shock image porn or a political twitter E-celeb and just got a bunch of NFTs.
>>16969637>>16969640@GrapeApe9khe is the head janny
>>16969642I don't have twitter. You do it pretty preeeeeeeeeeese!
>>16969434you should do a similar study for anti-US-military/anti-US-foreign policy in /k/. hell, not even anti-anything, just tell them how they lost the iran war and you will see the obvious biasbeware, though: your proxies will get banned in no time.>>16969487if OP used proxies for both Russian and not-Russian posts, then that obviously means there IS a bias.>>16969549understandable, though. he might lose his only income.>>16969615>huh? you cant report jannies or mods in any way for the last who known how many years.>>16969615you can, through IRC. not that they give a shit, though.
>>16969654One hot pocket a month is decent considering how much the average jannie is worth
If you notice the error bars...........Then you immediately realize this is SI garbage.
>>16969633I suspect it's a Russian bot covering for his colleague. No jannie is afraid to lose their position. You literally CANNOT REPORT THEM. Like by what mechanism will they even lose their position?
>>16969435Oh so it was you shitting up the catalogue with those kinds of threads all the time? I guess sacrifices must be made for science
>>16969725Let's be honest with ourselves anon, /int/ hasn't been good in years.
>>16969434Tried it and they moved my thread to /bant/. Very interesting...
>>16969434I visualised overseas media famous people to discuss in our minds projects and the American minds always thought about there's. They were worse for the job a well. A sold out group to themselves for a world art project.
Russians are just more sensitive. It is genetic
>>16969811I just learned that I was banned as well. Curious!
>>16969887Behead those who insult Monkey
>>16969888There was no insulting, which makes it even funnier.
>>16969788useless X faggots with large monetized accounts have been plundering it for content for a while now
>>16969434It's meant to be biased. Otherwise we end up with russia spam. /k/ would be unusable without bias
>It's meant to be biased.
>It's meant to be biasedkys
>get BTFO epic style>samefag to bump threadembarrassing. extreme dilation needed
>>16969974Ur talking about the jannie right?
>>16969434your result is as fake as your threads
Never post a heckin sciencirino against the ruling party, thats like science 101, wtf they teach you in uni
>>16970015Jannie seems mad.You couldn't even explain what's wrong with the methodology
