4chan's "Mo0t" is Time's #1 most influential person for 2009.

[Volcompat321]

lol iris

[IrisForscythe]

I obviously know what im talking about lolol

[Blitzkommando]

This may or may not go through your little pea-brain of yours, but I believe a scientist, physicist, or anyone who has made a live changing [Read: Helped] has a much more greater impact on the world than some lazy, unemplyed, bum who lives in his parent's basement.

P.S. Quit trolling everything or either you're really that stupid.

Stalin never quite helped anyone but he certainly dramatically affected the world. The same could be said of many, many people throughout history. While the effects are generally negative, it is hard not to find a sliver of 4chan in just about every college and highschool across the country, whether the person in question even knows that the joke or what have you actually came from 4chan. Hell, I can't go to a forum without finding some influence of 4chan somewhere, often daily. Whether it's the repetition of some meme or a reference or emulation of 4chan's style of writing I see it everywhere from online comics to, well, Time Magazine online.

The point is that moot created something that has built up to being one of the largest influences of online society. In that respect the numbers don't lie. There are almost no discussion boards online with a larger user base and with such rapid interaction amongst individuals from around the world. With millions of visitors per annum, if not per month, his creation has undoubtedly leaked into the mainstream culture. Hell, Rick Astley has had a resurgence from almost complete obscurity due to a joke that permeated the internet starting from 4chan with a topping off by his appearance on national (though internationally televised as well) television through his "Rickrolling" of the Macy's Thanksgiving Parade.

Are there others who have had greater influence than moot? Most certainly, both good and bad. But can I also easily see why he would also be mentioned? Absolutely as well. He's much like, say, Muhtar Kent. Nobody knows who Mr. Kent is, but nearly everyone in the world knows the company he is CEO of and that's Coca-Cola. While hardly everyone in the world knows of 4chan, and much less moot, there are people around the world that know of the memes and influences that have spilled forth from it. From a sociological perspective, he does have a great deal of indirect influence through his service.

Saying that only people who positively influence society are the only ones who should be mentioned would be like negating to mention people like Nero, Stalin, Hitler, and even lesser-known people like John Wilkes Booth or Jim Jones. Ultimately they became known for great evil, but that hardly negates that they had large impacts on society as well.

[Leviathan]

Stalin never quite helped anyone but he certainly dramatically affected the world. The same could be said of many, many people throughout history. While the effects are generally negative, it is hard not to find a sliver of 4chan in just about every college and highschool across the country, whether the person in question even knows that the joke or what have you actually came from 4chan. Hell, I can't go to a forum without finding some influence of 4chan somewhere, often daily. Whether it's the repetition of some meme or a reference or emulation of 4chan's style of writing I see it everywhere from online comics to, well, Time Magazine online.

The point is that moot created something that has built up to being one of the largest influences of online society. In that respect the numbers don't lie. There are almost no discussion boards online with a larger user base and with such rapid interaction amongst individuals from around the world. With millions of visitors per annum, if not per month, his creation has undoubtedly leaked into the mainstream culture. Hell, Rick Astley has had a resurgence from almost complete obscurity due to a joke that permeated the internet starting from 4chan with a topping off by his appearance on national (though internationally televised as well) television through his "Rickrolling" of the Macy's Thanksgiving Parade.

Are there others who have had greater influence than moot? Most certainly, both good and bad. But can I also easily see why he would also be mentioned? Absolutely as well. He's much like, say, Muhtar Kent. Nobody knows who Mr. Kent is, but nearly everyone in the world knows the company he is CEO of and that's Coca-Cola. While hardly everyone in the world knows of 4chan, and much less moot, there are people around the world that know of the memes and influences that have spilled forth from it. From a sociological perspective, he does have a great deal of indirect influence through his service.

Saying that only people who positively influence society are the only ones who should be mentioned would be like negating to mention people like Nero, Stalin, Hitler, and even lesser-known people like John Wilkes Booth or Jim Jones. Ultimately they became known for great evil, but that hardly negates that they had large impacts on society as well.

I know that. Like I said before, I'm not surprised.

[HolioArtillery]

Contributing does not mean "made stupider" D=

Nor does it mean "make people smarter." There is no positive or negative aspect to the word contribute. To contribute means merely to help advance something that had an outcome.

Also, I'm not really sure where the word contribute ever got into this. The poll was "influential" people. Nor did it speak of having a good or bad influence. In terms of quantity, 4 chan is one of the largest influences in the world. Everything from causing the rise of internet stars, mass Scientology protests throughout North America and Europe, untold amounts of identity theft ording 1000s of pizzas to people, bombing gamestop with massive amounts of prank calls asking for copies of Battletoads, etc. etc. It's taken the forefront of internet culture, which has the advantage of being worldwide rather than locked into a specific region. Moot himself isn't really that influential, but 4chan? Definitly. Time did a crappy ass job one time where the "Person of the Year" was "You." Came with a shitty slivery bit on a cover that acted as a mirror. They were talking about how ordinary people became influential with the rise of sites like youtube where people can voice their opinion and be heard (if they are popular enough.) I don't see why Time couldn't put 4chan on the cover.

[Shadowpawn]

Maybe Time didn't know what 4chan was in 2006, like the rest of the world? Just a wild hunch.

[The Red Mirage]

Maybe Time didn't know what 4chan was in 2006, like the rest of the world? Just a wild hunch.

I miss those days... sigh.

[HolioArtillery]

Maybe Time didn't know what 4chan was in 2006, like the rest of the world? Just a wild hunch.

Let me clarify in more detail, I meant that since they had a group of people as the person of the year, that wouldn't stop them from doing it again, this time with 4chan. Never once anywhere did I mention anything about changing past persons of the year and I don't believe that's our main topic here. I believe you misunderstood me. Just a wild hunch.

[King Koopa]

the vote wasn't hacked, just a bunch of 4channers voted for specific people in a specific spot.

Yes it was.
http://musicmachinery.com/2009/04/15...recision-hack/
http://musicmachinery.com/2009/04/27...ime-inc-loses/

[KaneKahn]

Funny stuff.