As much as I wish the plethora of argumentative idiots who post comments at
4chan would drop dead,
Jun, I'm mystified by
4chan itself being blamed for these supposedly-pornographic incursions into
YouTube. I read that article you linked and still don't know how they can assert
4chan itself -
i.e., the administration and/or ownership - is causing this dilemma.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if people who frequent
4chan are behind the invasion of "pornography" at
YouTube, but I'm not finding facts which would substantiate the claim
4chan's management is involved. I'd like to know of such facts, if anyone can find them. Bear in mind a call to flood
YouTube with "pornography" can easily be posted to
4chan, but that doesn't mean it's condoned by the Web site's management.
This isn't a defense of
4chan but rather a criticism of unsubstantiated accusations.
YouTube ain't what it used to be, that's for sure; and
4chan is only bearable if one peruses the images and avoids reading comments, many of which are posted by cretins who enjoy
ad hominum attacks.
=^..^=