/prog/ - 2010 — World4ch

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 0:48

This thread was created in 2010. The reason it exists is to point out that there is an ass bumping every thread created in 2006. Stop responding to threads from 2006.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 0:49

This thread is going to get bumped a year from now.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 1:04

>>2
You mean four years.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 1:14

>>3
The first necropost isn't going to take four years. These kids don't have that kind of patience.

Name: noko 2010-09-22 1:27

BUMP!!~

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 4:31

I don't understand why threads can't fucking lock after a short period of inactivity.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 4:35

>>6
LOCK MY ANUS

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 6:43

>>6
Why? Even locked threads by over 1000 posts are eventually unlocked and bumped by morons.

Old threads should be purged, like in imageboards. Also every thread should be auto-purged at the first Lain, HAX MY WHATEVER or weed-alike reference.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 6:47

SMOKE MY LAINUS

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 6:47

>>8
Purged so you can't point at them and say ``hey look /prog/ (sucked|didn't suck) back then''

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 9:30

I CONJURE THE SPIRITS OF THIS THREAD!

COME BACK TO LIFE!

FROM THE MIDDLE OF THE FRONT PAGE!

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 14:53

>>8
Why don't I understand? Because it would be totally trivial to lock them and make them stay that way. Why hasn't it been done?

No need to purge old threads.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 15:00

>>12
No need to purge old threads.
That's because you obviously haven't read any of them. There are really few threads worth keeping in /prog/, if any.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 15:13

>>13
Interestingly, all threads are of historical value, significant or otherwise. And entire world view of a specific date can be pieced together using posts and threads made around a certain time.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 16:33

>>14
Are you saying all this opiates shit has any value? Bollocks!

IHBT

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 16:47

>>15
No, but you can be all 'oh look, here was some spam, and that's why there are a load of bumps from 2006'

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 17:35

>>16
I think you mean ``oh look, here was some spam: a load of bumps from 2006''.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 18:18

>>17
They're both spam, asshole.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:23

>>18
I think you mean, asshole.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:36

>>18
Of course they're both fucking spam, but necroposting is a lot more obnoxious than just creating a bunch of ignorable threads.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:41

>>20
No it isn't, because necroposting is much easier to strip out with a Greasemonkey script.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:46

>>21
If by ``much easier'' you mean ``slightly harder but still not very hard''.
Or did you actually mean ``I'm using a Greasemonkey script someone else wrote but I don't understand how it works, or how I would go about writing one myself''?

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:48

Bitch ass bitch!

/prog/ mad!

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-23 3:45

>>21
implying filtering out ‘opiates’ threads is worth a /prague/ challenge

WABTC

2010

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 0:48

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 0:49

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 1:04

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 1:14

Name: noko 2010-09-22 1:27

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 4:31

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 4:35

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 6:43

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 6:47

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 6:47

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 9:30

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 14:53

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 15:00

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 15:13

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 16:33

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 16:47

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 17:35

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 18:18

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:23

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:36

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:41

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:46

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:48

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-23 3:45

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-03 4:37

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-04 17:07

2010

1 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 0:48

2 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 0:49

3 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 1:04

4 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 1:14

5 Name: noko 2010-09-22 1:27

6 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 4:31

7 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 4:35

8 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 6:43

9 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 6:47

10 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 6:47

11 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 9:30

12 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 14:53

13 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 15:00

14 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 15:13

15 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 16:33

16 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 16:47

17 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 17:35

18 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 18:18

19 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:23

20 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:36

21 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:41

22 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:46

23 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:48

24 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-23 3:45

25 Name: Anonymous 2011-02-03 4:37

26 Name: Anonymous 2011-02-04 17:07

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 0:48

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 0:49

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 1:04

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 1:14

Name: noko 2010-09-22 1:27

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 4:31

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 4:35

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 6:43

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 6:47

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 6:47

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 9:30

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 14:53

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 15:00

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 15:13

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 16:33

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 16:47

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 17:35

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 18:18

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:23

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:36

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:41

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:46

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-22 22:48

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-23 3:45

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-03 4:37

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-04 17:07