>>3575739Okay. Really, it's a two-pronged argument, which isn't fair of me but I was trying to be concise and make a quick point.
Here's a screenshot I took of the /p/ catalog.. I dunno, 20 minutes ago. I divided the threads up into four categories:
Photo threads (Green)
Gear Threads (Red)
Discussion/Meta threads (Blue)
Shitposts (Black)
There were 41 gear threads, 32 discussion threads, 30 shitpost threads, and 47 photo threads. There are always 150 threads on /p/, and around 1/3 are photo threads.Overall, not a terrible ratio for /p/, and I think it's actually improved over the last year or two.
However, /p/ doesn't sort by topic. /p/ sorts by last reply. If you look at the first 50 threads, only 13 of them are photo threads. 19 are gear threads, 10 are shitposts, 7 are discussion thread. Attention on /p/ all about displacement. Threads are constantly displacing each other at the top. Shitposts and low-post gear threads are created very frequently and thus displace all the content to threads 51-100 (e.g. pages 4-7). When you hide your photos in a general thread, you create a single thread that bumps relatively fast, but can only displace a single gear thread. If the 81 posters from the last full /RPT/ had all made even just 60 threads of their own photos, rather than a single damn thread, imagine how quickly the shitposts and low effort gear posts would get displaced at the top. What if we had 120 photo threads instead of 40?
The low displacement rate also means that there is an equal number of shitpost threads to photo threads in the first two pages, since those usually attract a lot of attention and have a relatively quick bump rate. Creating your own damn photo thread is about increasing the signal-to-noise ratio, something everyone on this board should be well familiar with. Drown out the noise, put your photos in their own thread. This is literally the way this board used to work until an old tripfag came up with the RPT, and it was glorious.
