Seeing as there are so many generals in this board... >1)

File: 22vv.jpg (33KB, 640x472px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 640x472px

>>29954943
Nice slide thread, OP

>>29954943
>do they usually fall into a pit of circlejerking until they sage themselves?

A lot of the time, yes.

File: smash-head-in-wall[1].jpg (46KB, 599x496px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 599x496px

>>29954961
It's almost like you didn't read both points before posting.

>>29954943
>Do they produce enough content or do they usually fall into a pit of circlejerking until they sage themselves?
sometimes they'll cycle through, going from bumps for a few threads to grinding out content on a regular basis for a few months to even a year sometimes
as for 2 a lot of them started off with some basic prompt that caught the attention of the writefag, sometimes after the writefag is finished up that'll be the end of it and you won't see the thread again, but other times the writefag keeps the thread alive long enough the other writefags or sometimes even drawfags look into the thread, like the idea and add their own content to it, and just like that, a new general is born

>>29954943
I like generals because it's very easy to filter them.

>>29955002
C'mon OP, cut the bullshit, ok?

>>29954943
1) They're inevitable, since you can only talk about the show so much. They are too hard and occasionally too unpredictable to filter, it's a royal pain to make a regex for every one of 100+ generals I don't care about.

>>29954943
Coming from someone who enjoys generals (and even writes for them) but thinks they've become unhealthily monopolizing:

For starters, people have been bitching about generals on this board for years. It is nothing new, nor do I even think there are that many more of them than there used to be. What is new is the lack of other types of content coming up to push generals down the board, which makes it feel like there's a lot more of them.

>1) Why are they the cancer of this board and what should we do to stop them? Is there something actually wrong with them? Do they produce enough content or do they usually fall into a pit of circlejerking until they sage themselves?
General can produce valuable content, and there's a difference between a general that is still getting active content and one that is picdumping for days between activity; the healthiest thing you can do for a General is to recognize when the content dries up and its done, and let it die. That said, the best thing you can do to minimize their influence is try to start other discussions. They may not last as long as generals, but they will happen - and that is what makes the difference.

>2) What are the elements needed to start one? How are they started? Do they necessarily have to be kicked off with a prompt? And if they are why are prompts so frowned upon?
In the beginning of their life cycle, Generals are nothing more than what happens when a thread autosages, but the content producers haven't finished and want to go on. They do not have to start with a prompt, but a prompt is a surefire way of kicking one off.

>>29955041

Prompts are frowned upon for two reasons: One is because they can get genuinely cancerous, especially as three-quarters are the same basic thing. But we've also had a lot less since Scruffy went on his mini-rampage last year, which I think was actually bad for board health: Having a prompt, letting it run for a few threads, and then dying to make room for more is the healthiest way to write. Spontaneity was a core part of what this board ran on, and not having that has pushed yet more people into generals.

File: deathstare.png (116KB, 229x274px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 229x274px

>>29955014
What bullshit are you talking about? All I see since I last posted in here is a board that keeps contradicting itself! But, oh my, I be damned by the almighty, that would fall into "hurr, /mlp/ is not one person".

These shitposters man, I swear...

>>29955075
>ellipses
You don't have to be here, you know.

File: uOfqsiD[1].png (63KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 625x626px

>>29955088
He's nitpicking on you op, stop giving him attention.

>>29954943
1) We end up with the average thread(80%) getting no more than 25 replies at max. Some are lucky to get replies at all.

2) A purpose. A bunch of links and contributers. No, but these /b/imbos enjoy /b/ait worthy OPs they can self-insert into. Because nobody can control them.

Well there you go. Have fun.

>>29954943
I think the problem is the perpetuation of threads that are already out of content and just survives out of bumps and image dumps.