[qqueue]

What other reasons were there to limit videos to 2 minutes, without audio? They certainly aren't technical limits.

The commons reasons cited on 4chan are:

1. All videos with sound would be "screamers", where the audio would get really loud unexpectedly halfway through, as a simple troll.

2. 4chan is an _image_ board, not a video board.

3. the MPAA and other copyright holders would crush 4chan with DCMA takedown requests for audio.

I feel like (1) could be solved technically with auto-mute and/or a soundcloud-style visible meter, as well as the novelty eventually wearing off.

For (2), it seems that 4chan's main goal of ephemeral content/anonymity would overrule the historical precedent for content on the site (and already does, if /f/ is any indication). If it works for vine/snapchat, why not 4chan?

(3) though seems like the major issue, especially for +2 minute videos.

[tormeh]

>as well as the novelty eventually wearing off.

You haven't been on 4chan much, have you? I can promise you it would never get old. Anyway, what 4chan wants is basically better GIFs.

[qqueue]

>what 4chan wants is basically better GIFs.

_And_ sound, as evidenced by anybody who posts links to youtube or soundcloud, e.g., /a/ or /mu/. Having such functionality directly in 4chan uploads would further the goal of anonymous ephemerality/content creation better than links to other sites. I can see your point if by "4chan" you mean "moot and site admins" due to the copyright concerns, but my feeling from other anons is that audio support would be awesome overall.

>You haven't been on 4chan much, have you?

If the novelty truly never wore off, every gif would still turn into cheetus after the first frame, and every link to youtube would still be Rick Astley.

Plus, think of your argument if we already had audio webms for their legitimate uses and had never known restriction. Would you give up audio on all webms just because of an occasional "screamer"? Would you give up all images just because some anons occasionally post shock pictures?

[anon4]

> as evidenced by anybody who posts links to youtube or soundcloud

Or people who post images that have audiodata hidden in them in increasingly sophisticated and hard to detect ways. /v/, /a/ and /mu/ have semi-regular sounds threads. I'm certain people will find a way to embed sound in video files in ways that can't be detected and update the media extension to handle those. We will have sounds one way or another.

[tormeh]

>If the novelty truly never wore off, every gif would still turn into cheetus after the first frame, and every link to youtube would still be Rick Astley.

These examples aren't actually gone, you know? Less common, certainly, but these trolling-memes don't really die out until there's something new to replace their exact use-case.