- Web IRC
>implying implications is a cheap and lazy way to implicate someone's reply on 4chan. This chanspeak actually started sometime in September 2009 on 4chan’s video game imageboard /v/ - “The Vidya”. Rumor has it that the meme was started as a 4channer typed in >greentext, then the word 'greentext' was replaced with "implying" and then implications was added on, making >implying implications.
>implying implications involves making an implication on a reply a 4channer says. Sometimes another 4channer implies an implication on a imply. Thus the phrase >implying implications. It’s really a cheap way to implicate something. Very cheap like a whore.
Then it spread to the other imageboards and it has gotten so bad that a 4chan moderator asked 4channers to find a better way to articulate themselves. But it's just too damn simple to use. The meme was finally established by moot himself when retitling /jp/ to /a/> *> /jp/, with the subtitle >implying.
Typical >implying thread
>implying implications is now rampant. Oftentimes >implying will be the result of a troll thread, and in some threads, cascades out of control from there with every reply being an unoriginal reaction image with >implying or just a >implying phrase appended to it.
Another type of thread is the >implying thread. In a bad attempt to self satirize, users will start a thread with the intent for it to just be a series of >implying replies. This is shit and it is never funny.
Implying implications is part of a series on
Visit the Memes Portal for complete coverage.
|Implying implications is part of a series on Language & Communication|