Consider two cliché Lit/Crit punching bags: New Criticism vs. New Historicism. Put crudely, New Criticism treats the text in isolation, claiming the provenance of a text gets in the way of understanding it. A corollary to this is there is such a thing as great literature, aspects of which can be identified and studied to determine why some texts are great and some are not. In contrast, New Historicism revels in context, how the text is part of the web of the historical times where the author lived. Also, many things can be Great Art besides dead white male products.

Online message board posting is the perfect blend: none of us know anything about each other, a nod at the New Critics, but what we post is ephemeral silliness (including this post, of course). It is the opposite of Great Literature; a pixel-destroying power failure can wipe out all we write.

Of course both schools of criticism are officially dead, but not being a card-carrying lit critter I don't know that. Still, it seems to me reading message board posts makes us all New Critics, even though what we post would make those self-important guys fifty years ago cringe and deny any relationship to us.