>>10922032

Combination of both. Bakers are a weak point in the system. There is no official capacity for control aside from the board owner and so bakers will be a contentious point as they are both necessary to maintain cohesion and yet that capacity lends itself to all the trappings of influence.

If only one baker is a glowing nigger, it simply has to work to shape the 'baker culture' and methods/process in such a way that it can sow distrust and confusion when it wants to.

Anons are not divided, anons are under attack and all that. Many bakers are people who put in their time. Many anons are those who put in their time, and all of us are a tinge autistic and by virtue of being here, the argumentative and headstrong sort.

So when you have a group of revolutionaries on a forum, someone who wants to disrupt them will obviously target the 'system' which orders them, as their nature will be to revolt against their own system of organization.

But as we are all generally anonymous on the boards, it is harder to pull off in practice, as our systems of organization are not tied to a specific person or persons. Classical methods to subvert a revolution by sowing suspicion may seem to work well because everyone but "us" glows in CIA - but it doesn't really work well because the next bread, we are all different people.

This is why, long ago and since, I have been rather critical of attempts by some on the board to 'establish' identities - like AFLB. Regardless of the intent behind it to begin with, it will be used in times like this to try and splinter the movement and it has been attempted several times in the past.

Our opponents will try to create the appearance of traitors or weasels to make everyone paranoid and to rally under different leaders. That is why being anonymous here is our strength.

>>10922342

Few other boards are as high traffic as this one. We are about at the limit of what can be practically maintained as, effectively, a chat room.

A bread can fly by in as little as twenty minutes when things get stupidly active. Bakers are going to be people who can watch the bread and have the time to sit at their computer (I can't imagine baking by phone) for a few hours to do little but bake.

That constrains the number of people who can take up the role because it is somewhat demanding. I phone fag on night shift literally at work - but can't bake on night shift even when an ebake is needed.

So - there is naturally going to be a group of people who rally up to do this as their club/hobby, because it is like a sort of job to bake and requires some commitment.

Of course - this is always going to result in some tension between the bakers and the anons who fleet in and out of the board as it's a bit contrary to the idea of a board of random anons randomly taking up the task of making the next bread as needed.

That being said, that point of tension is being pressured at the moment by no coincidence. It doesn't do any good to throw accusations around of who is doing it and why - it just needs to be understood that everyone pulling out their axe to grind is what the proverbial opposition wants.

>>10922609

Well, I will say: "what if I told you I know how to bake?"

Even if there are a hundred bakers present in a bread, there is only one baker for the next bread. If a dozen anons all jump up to create the 'real' bread, then we have twelve breads and a bread war.

The issue isn't that anons aren't baking - the issue is that we have a contest between two groups to be "the real bread".

That could be because there are people who are legitimately upset their hard work up to this point has been attacked. It could be because there are anons who are legitimately upset with bakers/unions thereof. It could be that these two groups have been set in motion against each other by bad actors.

It could also be bad actors directly.

My point is that "learn to bake" has never been a solution to the argument and, if anything, would only seed the current contest without resolving the underlying issues driving it. More bakers doesn't resolve the bread contest. At best it weakens individuals "of the baker union" - but there will always be arguments over what to put into notables, what goes into and comes out of pastebin, format, etc.

To that end, I believe we have inflated the job of bakers to a point where it is more 'formal' than it needs to be and is creating many of the points of argument. Anons don't want the "real bread" and don't care for the argument. Anons mostly want to see one general discussion bread with the current number.

Issues regarding exactly who is baking and exactly what gets into notables are secondary and tertiary concerns.

>>10922792

It might resolve some points, but would likely introduce others. How would an AI decide notables? If it works based on 'nominations' - then what if a bad actor or troll went through, flagging everything as notable?

Some of it is just the design limitations of both the board and people. There might be a better way to implement notables into 8kun, itself - but the overall 'will the real baker please stand up' problem will almost always exist. Who gets to decide what the bread AI's script and criteria are?

Or - what would stop a bad actor from simply spamming fake new breads? We have some defenses against this as a baker usually rogers up in a bread and then posts a link to their bake - but the attack vector still exists.

About as close as I saw to a system that might work a bit better was how ZeroNet handled ids. Even then - a lot of that was very WIP and we only saw a few situations where people tried to attack it and we had to develop countermeasures. So increased exposure creates increased minds trying to exploit the system. We can write a lot of things down on paper that look good but then will fail once put into the field.