There have been notable exceptions where famefagging is allowed and even celebrated, but they have tended to be anons that have happened to achieve chan fame, not normie famefags that have set foot in the chans.
https://news.rpi.edu/luwakkey/2902#sthash.wuHag3ob.dpuf
“In general, people do not like to have an unpopular opinion and are always seeking to try locally to come to consensus. We set up this dynamic in each of our models,” said SCNARC Research Associate and corresponding paper author Sameet Sreenivasan. To accomplish this, each of the individuals in the models “talked” to each other about their opinion. If the listener held the same opinions as the speaker, it reinforced the listener’s belief. If the opinion was different, the listener considered it and moved on to talk to another person. If that person also held this new belief, the listener then adopted that belief.
“As agents of change start to convince more and more people, the situation begins to change,” Sreenivasan said. “People begin to question their own views at first and then completely adopt the new view to spread it even further. If the true believers just influenced their neighbors, that wouldn’t change anything within the larger system, as we saw with percentages less than 10.”
The research has broad implications for understanding how opinion spreads. “There are clearly situations in which it helps to know how to efficiently spread some opinion or how to suppress a developing opinion,” said Associate Professor of Physics and co-author of the paper Gyorgy Korniss. “Some examples might be the need to quickly convince a town to move before a hurricane or spread new information on the prevention of disease in a rural village.”
The researchers are now looking for partners within the social sciences and other fields to compare their computational models to historical examples. They are also looking to study how the percentage might change when input into a model where the society is polarized. Instead of simply holding one traditional view, the society would instead hold two opposing viewpoints. An example of this polarization would be Democrat versus Republican.
It's because they're taken from the twatter.
Twatter auto-names image files uploaded to twats.
Back in the early days we were in the mid-Ds.
That's where DOITQ came from, remember?
Actually, pic related would have been tough for Q to write after training us so carefully to understand that THERE ARE NO COINCIDENCES. Some still believe in DOITQ to this day.
Something to add to the Overton Window stuff that we have been talking about since Day 1.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
>Shifting the Overton Window involves proponents of policies outside the window persuading the public to expand the window. Proponents of current policies, or similar ones within the window, seek to convince people that policies outside it should be deemed unacceptable.
We are trying to shift the window one way while the left is doing all they can to wrench it as far as possible the other way.
<drag queen fucking story hour