I don't think I would use it, I already feel like idiot when I read hardware threads.
>>3453 No, I stopped posting when cancer was at its record. As a result whole site suffered when remaining 20% of quality posters left, thus stopping creating 80% of quality threads (Pareto Principle). Maybe hapase spam was a way to attract traffic? We will never know.
The Pareto Principle states that it takes roughly 20% of the effort to finish 80% of the task at hand. Not that 20% of the group contribute to 80% of the work. That's just shit management.
ALTHOUGH, I MUST SAY, IN CAPS BECAUSE II LIKE TO YELL, LOUDLY, AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
THAT - wait shit I might be on something I wonder - AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA =
okay so
fuck where was I
SCHIZO POSTING
Okary so um like some dudes or fake dudes, I mean "women" might argue that like (trans)
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAO"EIM
MIGHT FUCKING ARGUE
shit thinking is hard
THAT...um.........
o YEAH! THAT IF THE Pseudo-Science Board WAS actually not not fucking created, that um
fuck
that uhhhhhh
um
People might post on that topc for the fuck of it?
When I FUCKING PUT IT THAT FUCKING WAY IT DOESN'T SOUND SO FINGER LICKIN' GOOD
>>5787 i'm not sure what you mean. the point i was making was that some conversations on nanochan contain scientific topics regardless of whether there is a board for it. at this point there isn't too many explicit science discussion for an exclusive board.
What do nanons and Hapase think about the creation of a science board? Net goods, net bads? What do you think?