So we've had /his/ for a while now. This is my first post on this board, I was giving it a few months so all the memers and retards from /pol/ would go away.
What's the verdict on /his/ so far? Any intelligent discussion to be found?
Too much religion shit. I'd be fine if they discussed actual theology or some sort of relation between a sect/religion on history but they don't. It's always moronic baiting and petty arguments.
There are two distinct groups here that I've seen: the liberal minded college students (such as myself) and very conservative religious folks (mostly orthodox christian). There's a smattering of other groups including a growing population of /pol/ shitposters but the real problem is the arguing about religion of the two above mentioned groups
>half of it religion/nietzsche shit
>most of the rest pop history and always the same threads
>"lets talk about WW2" "who is da best general eva" "hitler did nothing wrong" "history based vidya gamez" "i dont want to read books, can anyone redpill me on this topic"
If you look at the catalog, most threads have just 5-6 posts and are then dieing.
The general level of discussion is also pretty low with mostly only a very basic understanding of the topic at hand if at all.
You'll get a good discussion if the subject is not a meme and relatively little-known. You'll get epic threads on the Second Congo War or the economics of the Incan empire, but as soon as you get to stuff like WWII or Christianity, it's shitposting central.
The history is mostly shit, honestly. The philosophy and religion threads have just moved from /lit/ and stayed the same or even worse, and the best advice about history you can get from this board is to just read actual historians.
The problem of the religious vs atheist fights is not an issue regarding God or theology.
It's about perspective on history.
Christians believe in the factual 6000 years.
Atheists believe in billions of years, Flintstone monkey stories and pop-sci garbage.
It's a battle between world-views.
/his/ has to choose what world-view to view history with, before we can have any discussion on any historical event.
>Christians believe in the factual 6000 years.
Nope. Stop projecting.
The historical side is pretty good, especially when it comes to military history; I learned quite a lot about this particular topic.
The philosophy side is rather amateurish but when it's bona fide it's alright.
Some social science threads are also good, and I enjoy the general academic banter too.
Don't really care much about the religion bit, but some of it at least looks shitposty.
I'm still undecided about whether or not we need /hum/.
Lots of interresting stuff that would have 404ed and shittrolled waaaay too fast on /pol.
Srsly had some outstanding threads from time ot time but for fucks sacke give those atheist vs religion and religion a vs religion b spammers an own board. That shit is only acceptable here in terms of influence on HISTORY not as of now up to general debate.
All in all, could have been worse. Saved some good photos, got some awesome reading materials and websites to read on and got even a little more useless information into my head. So yeah, been worth it so far, but lots of room for improvement.
Thanks for anyone bringing quality threads on this board so far.
Atheist vs. religious shitposting is annoying. Threads on religion that don't get combative between these groups (or religious threads that aren't full of different denominations baiting each other) are alright. Sometimes it's fun to learn about the intricacies of this shit. I could do with more threads where informed people talk about Islam.
Philosophy threads have been fun or at least a little edifying to me.
Pop history threads often become garbage but whatever.
Slightly more obscure history stuff can get good. We simply need a slightly larger population to get these threads moving, and to get them more often.
Overall I'm real happy we have this board.
All the specific history and military history threads are great. I've actually learned new shit from them. The philosophy threads are, even if they inevitably degenerate into flame wars. And I strongly dislike all the religion/atheism threads. Waste of time tbqh. Overall, I'm glad based Hiro added it.
Guys - here's what we do - we make the atheists vs. religiousfags threads a general, and we put it in the sticky that ANY topic vaguely related to the existence of God etc. goes there. Any thread created that isn't the general gets 404'd immediately.
That way, the middle school atheists and christians get to fling shit at each other, whilst the rest of the board gets cleaned up for proper historical / religious discussion.
nice idea but it won't make a bit of difference, because the problem isn't those threads in general (you can always hide them) but that these fucks invade actual religion discussion threads.
Excessive amount of whining about opinions people think are /pol/ or tumblr and lots of pointless arguments about religion or philosophy.
A bit slow for my tastes, but its much less depressing than /pol/ so I'd say I like the board overall.
This board is one of the more mature, a lot of posters manage to ignore most of the low quality bait.
And the actually history being discussed , especially when it's more obscure, is top notch.
The religious generals aren't even a problem, it's the religion/atheist bait threads that cause the problems
Unless it's history of religion, mods should confine those posts to the general.
That's a shit idea. Atheism v. Theism threads is a cancer to itself that we cant treat by simply allowing it to be in one place. Like, /pol/, it will spill over everywhere else.
Atheism v. Theism threads need to change to discuss the philosophical systems themselves. Instead of "argue for your god and I'll tell you why you're wrong" focus on both sides arguing the legitimacy of their worldview as a whole.
>If they accept or reject a god or gods, what do you they mean by that
>How does their worldview work under these circumstances?
It would open up the discussion tremendously if people pushed for such a thing to occur instead of very shallow theism v. atheism fights where the very concept of divinity being discussed isn't even clearly labelled ahead of time.
I don't even get the point of religious threads. There's no discussion to be had. Religious people operate on faith, not evidence. The belief relies solely on and primarily on this. The argument isn't on even ground so much as it is in different fucking galaxies.
>where the very concept of divinity being discussed isn't even clearly labelled ahead of time
forget that, the atheists won't even define their own position.
>gnostic theism agnostic atheism agnostic theism gnostic atheism
to hell with the cuck sam harris bait just look at a goddamn dictionary you stupid faggots
I agree with this. Contentious issues or discussions that lend themselves to shit posting and the like should be banned and deleted on site unless the nature of the discussion is clearly defined in the OP. Ie: holocaust needs to have a specific focus of discussion, religion vs atheism needs to have a specific focus, and the discussion must be about something that can actually discussed. Faith vs evidence is not and cannot really be a discussion. The nature of morality in relation to theism vs anti-theism/agnosticism can be.
Suprisngly though, outside of those two subjects /his/torians have been pretty good about having relatively high level discourse.