Stop closing dios vs. rothko contest criticism threads

October 22, 2005 9:10 AM

Hey, Matt, everyone else doesn't think the contest is great. You might know that, of course, if you could manage not to close a thread as soon as you don't like the direction in which it turns. [mi]
posted by dame to etiquette/policy at 9:10 AM (164 comments total)

Yes, I am aware that you are God King and in the end, what you say goes. However, it also seems pretty clear that everyone hasn't talked themselves out, and that premature thread closings just lead to more threads. So can you ease up a little? I know this contest was partly your baby, but I think it's probably better to just let everyone argue it to death, then we can all move along satisfied.
posted by dame at 9:11 AM on October 22, 2005

Winner stays on, I say.
posted by NinjaPirate at 9:11 AM on October 22, 2005

Who still wants to talk about this?
posted by 23skidoo at 9:20 AM on October 22, 2005

So, how 'bout those White Sox, huh?
posted by jonmc at 9:27 AM on October 22, 2005

My pa is a Sox fan from his childhood, when he picked the Sox to be contrarian. He's elated. And since I hate the Cardinals, and St. Louis in general, I was glad to see the Astros beat 'em. So let's hope for a Sox win... (Every year is an abacus of preferences, as Illich made a deal to never let the Tigers appear in a Series again if the Wings could repeat.)
posted by klangklangston at 9:32 AM on October 22, 2005

And Dame: It's like one or two vocal members who hate the idea and are winding themselves up. The threads degenerate quickly and are pretty useless for any cogent arguments. We know what their standpoints are, and it's a moot point now. I'm hoping that this thread gets closed quickly too.
posted by klangklangston at 9:33 AM on October 22, 2005

Beautiful Saturday morning here--bright and crisp, with lovely fall colors. The maple trees are particularly resplendent. In fact, I just had some waffles with real maple syrup! Who doesn't like waffles?
posted by LarryC at 9:35 AM on October 22, 2005

Nah, I respect the whole not-since-1917 thing and am happy for the Sox fans, but I've gotta root for the Astros. Two words: Roger Clemens. Let the big guy go out with a bang. I hated him in '86, but the guy's earned his World Series rings.

What? Did somebody say something about a contest?
posted by languagehat at 9:46 AM on October 22, 2005

So where do I chuck in my $5 for matteo or amberglow?
posted by adamvasco at 9:47 AM on October 22, 2005

sadly, it fits--the contest had the explicit stated intention of shutting down one member's speech for a week, so why expect that discussion about the contest would be different?
posted by amberglow at 9:48 AM on October 22, 2005

I can't believe this is still going on. The whole "gift of silence" thing doesn't work if the same people keep talking about it over and over.
posted by trey at 9:48 AM on October 22, 2005

I'm with klangklangston, I don't see the point of leaving the threads open if the "discussion" is just two people saying the same things over and over again and a whole lot of off-topic blather.
posted by amarynth at 9:50 AM on October 22, 2005

i think its pretty queer too okay dad???????
posted by naxosaxur at 9:55 AM on October 22, 2005

i think its pretty queer too okay dad???????
ZOMG HETERONORMATIVISM
posted by darukaru at 10:01 AM on October 22, 2005

Metafilter: people saying the same things over and over again and a whole lot of off-topic blather
posted by 23skidoo at 10:02 AM on October 22, 2005

There were more than a few members who thought the idea was crappy--only amberglow and matteo are belligerent enough to keep arguing in the face of such sneering contempt for their position.
posted by hototogisu at 10:03 AM on October 22, 2005

shut up shut up shut up
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 10:10 AM on October 22, 2005

Too many people have too much invested in their online personality. If it weren't MeFi and it were www.somethingfuckingdullwith500members.com there wouldn't be half as much childish behaviour.

on preview - abso-fucking-lutely right EB
posted by longbaugh at 10:15 AM on October 22, 2005

In fact, there is a fairly big maple tree just outside my kitchen. I have thought about tapping it to make my own syrup, but I am concerned that a) the weather here in SW Missouri isn't optimal for maple sugar production, b) it might damage the tree, and c) how much syrup can you get from one tree anyway?
posted by LarryC at 10:18 AM on October 22, 2005

WHAT THE FUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

STOP!!!!

NO ONE CARES WHAT YOU THINK!!!



!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
posted by shmegegge at 10:20 AM on October 22, 2005

FWIW, I agree with matteo and amberglow. The whole MetaSurvivor idea feels icky and wrong for all the reasons pointed out above. It's also just a dumb idea. How exactly does banning a vocal member "in good fun" help towards the goal of reducing personal attacks on the site? The whole thing was lame from the get-go. Anyways, it's over and done so let's just move on.
posted by nixerman at 10:20 AM on October 22, 2005

LarryC: More than enough for one man's pancakes.
posted by mullacc at 10:23 AM on October 22, 2005

I... said... GOOD... DAY... sir!
posted by blue_beetle at 10:25 AM on October 22, 2005

Metafilter has turned into romper room.

I hated him in '86, but the guy's earned his World Series rings.

Earned? Hitching up to your third team with a 200 million dollar payroll to get your first world series is hardly 'earning' it.

Now Jeff Bagwell? That would be a nice story.
posted by justgary at 10:25 AM on October 22, 2005

Besides, I though $500 was the going rate to get someone killed off?
posted by blue_beetle at 10:25 AM on October 22, 2005

Maybe we can have the opposite contest: MetaSlave. If we raise $1000 for CC, mathowie and jessamyn kidnap Kottke and force him to participate in every MeFi, MeTa and AskMe thread for one week.
posted by mullacc at 10:26 AM on October 22, 2005

Metafilter has turned into romper room.

I always preferred The Magic Garden. There's something about acoustic guitar sling crypto-lesbians and singing flowers that just warms the cockles.
posted by jonmc at 10:27 AM on October 22, 2005

Hey everybody, quonsar is back!

Contest haters: we gotcha, you think the contest was bad and divisive. Okeydokey. It's over.

Also: has Matt really "banned" AR, or is AR just voluntarily being quiet as part of the game? If it's still a voluntary silence, I really can't see what the problem is. If the whole dunk tank thing is just too oppressive and too horrible or whatever, AR could always just start talking again.

Isn't it weird how this whole thing has made AR and dios look a lot more reasonable and a whole group of otherwise reasonable people unreasonable?
posted by Mid at 10:28 AM on October 22, 2005

CAN'T YOU PEOPLE READ? DAME ISN'T SATISFIED!
posted by Kwantsar at 10:33 AM on October 22, 2005

Dude, AR is banned for a week. MeFi doesn't fuck around.
posted by mullacc at 10:34 AM on October 22, 2005

...only amberglow and matteo are belligerent enough to keep arguing in the face of such sneering contempt for their position. ...
wrong. and this thread is further evidence of that--and i really wouldn't use the words "sneering contempt" if i was you--what are you showing now, darling?
posted by amberglow at 10:36 AM on October 22, 2005

What's left to be said that hasn't been said?

dame, if this was so important to you, why did you say nothing on either of the previous threads? Is this thread just because you were out of town and feel like you didn't have your chance to weigh in on it yet?

Most of us agree with Matt that that thread had gone rancid with little to no hope for recovery. If he was using his admin power to squelch any dissent from the membership he could have just deleted the thread.

Either come up with something startling and new to say about this, or give it a rest already.
posted by soyjoy at 10:41 AM on October 22, 2005

hototogisu is showing sneering contempt for your position, and he practically admitted as much. Did you misunderstand?
posted by Kwantsar at 10:41 AM on October 22, 2005

Mid, it's hardly voluntary. It'd be one thing if mathowie hadn't been the one who'd approached them, perhaps. Still, its "voluntary" nature doesn't change the fact that it's a bad idea. Again: "silencing" members for a week leads to less personal animosity, how again?

If this was a joke--and I think most people are taking it as a joke--fine, it's just a joke. Not a very funny joke but most jokes aren't. But the whole contest was sold on this very shaky premise of decreasing personal attacks. In this light, it's a bad idea and a very bad precedent. If the only tool we have to deal with troublesome members is voting people off the island, well... you can imagine where this might lead.
posted by nixerman at 10:42 AM on October 22, 2005

amberglow: I fail to see how you could have misread that comment so blatantly.
posted by hototogisu at 10:42 AM on October 22, 2005

I think amberglow is attacking a comment that actually supported him, but I'm not sure.
posted by Mid at 10:43 AM on October 22, 2005

Years ago, hiking (and lost) in Vermont, I wandered into a stand of maples with black pipes attached to them, like some spooky alien forest cancer. Following them downhill, I came to the sugar house. Genius! The farmer was letting gravity do the harvesting, he just fired up the boilers and voila, golden maple goodness.
posted by LarryC at 10:43 AM on October 22, 2005

Jesus, Kwantsar is doing it too. If this entire thread isn't mockery of yours and matteo's objections amgerglow, I don't know what is. Others objected in the original thread (reflecked and andrew cooke, I think, among others), but you two are the only ones with the stamina to talk through all of this noise.
posted by hototogisu at 10:43 AM on October 22, 2005

What's left to be said that hasn't been said?

I find the Kool-aid man vaguely erotic.


(I'm fairly sure that hasn't been said)
posted by jonmc at 10:44 AM on October 22, 2005

The original thread was still open, so I prefered continued protests about the idea of the contest to stay there, so I closed them. I didn't start a new thread about it reaching $500 to rehash the same pointless arguments.
posted by mathowie at 10:47 AM on October 22, 2005

I was kinda worried that without rothko or dios, this would be a week lacking in hot MetaTalk action. I'm happy to see the entertainment continues in their absence.
posted by Bugbread at 10:47 AM on October 22, 2005

Again: "silencing" members for a week leads to less personal animosity, how again?

I think the ultimate message, matt, dios and rothko are trying to send with this is not to take this thing of ours so seriously. Judging by much of the reaction, it seems not to have worked. I applaud the gesture though.

There was a Donahue I watched years ago where Phil invited veiwers to read letters to him on the air. This one gentleman had a letter where he asked Phil to "put a sock in it for once." Phil extracted an argyle from his jacket pocket and stuffed in his mouth for a few moments, and everyone had a chuckle. I veiw this whole episode as something similar.
posted by jonmc at 10:48 AM on October 22, 2005

Could I just take this time to point out that this is in fact the first time I have ever been on television?
posted by mr_crash_davis at 10:48 AM on October 22, 2005

Speaking of maple trees, what's up with the foliage this year? Trees that had that neon red-orange color in years past are just kind of yellow this year. Is it the weather, or what?
posted by Kirth Gerson at 10:48 AM on October 22, 2005

nixerman : "Again: 'silencing' members for a week leads to less personal animosity, how again? "

I dunno the exact mechanism, but I do feel better towards dios and rothko now.
posted by Bugbread at 10:50 AM on October 22, 2005

I'm a wuss; I didn't keep arguing. It didn't seem like any arguement would change what was happening. I still see the whole thing as not really voluntary by the participants, because there exists a kind of coercion that is subtle: the suggestion of a person in authority.dios and Rothko WERE good sports; if either one had demurred, it would have been "noted".

I'm not really trying for any moral high ground; it just gives me a sense that Bread and Circuses are seen to be a good thing.

It does no harm to weigh in as being amongst the "squicked". Thank you, dame.
posted by reflecked at 10:51 AM on October 22, 2005

LarryC, you should go talk to John Martin. That will save this thread.
posted by peacay at 10:53 AM on October 22, 2005

When I flew over some of upstate New York it was the first time I'd really seen maple stands from the top. They were definitely oranger than they were in Vermont. We had a lot of rain that really beat a lot of the leaves off of the trees early.
posted by jessamyn at 10:54 AM on October 22, 2005

Matt's head on a platter. Is that really too much to ask?
posted by justgary at 10:54 AM on October 22, 2005

This morning I told pips the whole story of this episode. She said, "I don't know how can hang out there so much. That place would send my blood pressure through the roof."
posted by jonmc at 10:55 AM on October 22, 2005

Nixerman: from what I'm reading, it seems like almost everyone thinks that AR and dios are really good sports about this whole thing. There is a certain civility and laughing-at-one's-self aspect being shown by both of them that I think has surprised most people.

In that respect, I think the game has been a huge success and has improved the atmosphere around here.

And I don't think that Matt ever proposed this as some sort of "tool" that we are going to use in the future. I think it's a lark, a one-off fun thing.

As to whether it was "voluntary" or not, come on. Matt isn't a fricking policeman coercing a confession. This is a website, and Matt sent an e-mail, I assume, asking whether these guys would participate. I very much doubt that they felt "pressure" to say yes. What's Matt going to do? Put you in jail; fire you? Send you a nasty e-mail? This whole Matt-as-coercive-orge this is just ridiculous.
posted by Mid at 10:56 AM on October 22, 2005

reflecked : "if either one had demurred, it would have been 'noted'. "

Nobody's noted the private offer I turned Matt down on.
posted by Bugbread at 10:57 AM on October 22, 2005

Matt doesn't not-kiss and tell, bugbread...
posted by hototogisu at 10:59 AM on October 22, 2005

Kirth: It is a side effect of a dry summer in many parts of the country. The beautiful colors here are mostly in town, where the trees got watered, and along the waterways. The hillsides are pretty blah.
posted by LarryC at 11:00 AM on October 22, 2005

hototogisu : "Matt doesn't not-kiss and tell, bugbread..."

Le point du moi exactleaux.
posted by Bugbread at 11:01 AM on October 22, 2005

he's discreet like that.
posted by hototogisu at 11:02 AM on October 22, 2005

a kind of coercion that is subtle: the suggestion of a person in authority.dios and Rothko WERE good sports; if either one had demurred, it would have been "noted".

I'm not petty. If either didn't want to go along with it, it wouldn't have happened, it wouldn't have ever been made public, and you wouldn't know about it. I squared everything away with both individuals privately and got their go-ahead before I made anything public.

That's not coercion. I asked if they'd be willing to participate in a fundraiser for a good cause and they both said yes (I honestly didn't think they would). The whole point of it was to let everyone take the specific posters a bit less seriously by showing they could do that themselves. I'd say it was a success, even I have a much higher opinion of both -- they're not wound as tightly as you think.

So again, no one was forced into anything and if they protested, I wasn't going to say anything in public -- that's a supremely asshole thing to do and does no good for anyone involved.
posted by mathowie at 11:04 AM on October 22, 2005

This is riciculous...
And the attacks visible here kinda prove how really bad the original "contest" and "battle" was to begin with. Any excuse to attack, huh? Who needs a contest?
posted by amberglow at 6:49 PM PST on October 21 [!]

As far as I can tell, the first "attack" in the original thread was by (guess who?)....
and considering the way it's going as of now, the right-wingers demonstrate -- again -- that they have more money and they are ready to use it to silence/oppress the people.
same as it ever was.
posted by matteo at 5:31 PM PST on October 19 [!]

This only really seemed to get ugly once matteo started throwing his little tantrum.
posted by Stauf at 11:04 AM on October 22, 2005

Guys, you don't understand! It feels icky. Now, let's sit in a circle, discuss our feelings, and wrap it off with a rousing round of "Kumbaya" "The Internationale."
posted by keswick at 11:05 AM on October 22, 2005

PRECISELY! thank you stauf. this whole "This fundraiser for a non profit organization is beneath me!" nonsense is nothing less than attention whoring and snobbery.

shut up already. you're ruining metafilter.
posted by shmegegge at 11:09 AM on October 22, 2005

Weather indeed Kirth, you've been out in the Reach too long. Earth's atmosphere has been egregiously wracked. The scurrilous plutocrats have let their profligate concupiscence overwhelm intellection.
posted by Mr T at 11:16 AM on October 22, 2005

I volunteer to be part of any future donation events. I request that should I "win" (ie. raise the most money), the money go to Heifer.org in the name of MetaFilter, to purchase livestock for third-world villages.
posted by five fresh fish at 11:18 AM on October 22, 2005

Seriously, do you people really think that this online equivalent of a bachelor auction actually says anything about freedom of speech here on MetaFilter or that dios and rothko are somehow being oppressed? It's not like those two have never had any issues about doing the unpopular thing, so subtly co-ercing them into doing this wouldn't really have worked even if it had been tried.
posted by lazy-ville at 11:31 AM on October 22, 2005

Metafilter: I fail to see how you could have misread that comment so blatantly.

Sorry.

Keith: We've gotten really insanely red leaves on the maples that have turned, but the ones in my front and back yard are still green. It may have to do with the species. I know there's some way to tell sugar content by the leaves, but I don't remember high school botany anymore.
I do know that you can tap most of them, and there are sites online that tell you how to do it. However, my uncle did this last year and ended up boiling the syrup for 16 hours straight before getting anywhere near viscous enough. It is, however, some of the tastiest damn syrup I've ever had. Shame I never got to thank him for it properly.
posted by klangklangston at 11:32 AM on October 22, 2005

Whups. It's "Kirth" not "Keith." And Garamond had been making me so much happier with Metatalk... (It makes you all seem so dignified, even when you're batshit insane.)
posted by klangklangston at 11:33 AM on October 22, 2005

wait, didn't you just say that yesterday?
posted by hototogisu at 11:37 AM on October 22, 2005

I have to disagree with languagehat. I still haven't forgiven Roger Clemens for his 1993-1996 vacation. I'm starting to think I never will. I'd be all for the 'stros otherwise, but I gotta say, go Pale Hose.
posted by .kobayashi. at 11:39 AM on October 22, 2005

Hototo: I think I did, on Metachat. Still, how can I stop pimping for Garamond, well-known as God's font?
posted by klangklangston at 11:43 AM on October 22, 2005

Darnit klangklangston, your pimping of Garamond worked on me, but now I want to change it back and can't remember the default. Help?
posted by loquax at 11:51 AM on October 22, 2005

Somehow this rings false--I wasn't reading Metachat yesterday.

What have you done with my mind??
posted by hototogisu at 11:52 AM on October 22, 2005

Matt, i don't think you're a petty man, nor did i think you would have said anything publicly if either person had preferred not to participate. The closest analogy i can come up with is...

Have you ever been in a workplace that gets involved with the United Way fundraising campaign? The part that's icky is when every employee is given a pledge card, and it's mandatory to turn in the card to either your manager or HR, even if you gave elsewhere, you are expected to put a zero on the card and turn it in. The coercive part is that your boss always knows if you didn't give, and it colours their perception of what kind of person/cooperative employee you are.

I don't always say things as well as I'd like; it wasn't my intent to impugn motives, but to point out that a refusal would be added to the gestalt you have of that person who refused.

Baseball is boring unless I can play (3rd base,please). The leaves are vibrant, though, especially in the meadow at the top of Komas bluffs.
posted by reflecked at 11:53 AM on October 22, 2005

Go White Sox Go White Sox Go White Sox Fuck Roger Clemens Go White Sox Go White Sox GO YOU SOX GOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
posted by scody at 11:55 AM on October 22, 2005

now I want to change it back and can't remember the default. Help?

"Comic Sans MS" ;)
posted by boaz at 11:57 AM on October 22, 2005

Loquax: You don't appreciate the mature serifed nature of Garamond? Feh. I bet you're just waiting to enforce Bazooka or Snowcaps on your page...

Refleckted: If Matt is my boss, I want a raise.
posted by klangklangston at 11:58 AM on October 22, 2005

Could I just take this time to point out that this is in fact probably the last time I will ever be on television?
posted by mr_crash_davis at 11:59 AM on October 22, 2005

Help, Help, I'm being oppressed.

I find a number of things wrong with the 2 posts that have called out the original contest. They border on malicious and sarcastic in the way they are worded. The whole "if you could manage not to close a thread as soon as you don't like the direction in which it turns." is an odd claim as the majority of posts where insubstantial.

So, is banning someone because of objectionable behavior any less "tyrannical" then engaging in a consensual fund raiser?

Yes, I am aware that you are God King and in the end, what you say goes.

So move on, find something else to do on this nice Saturday.

I am so tempted to engage in Caps Lock day behavior here.
posted by edgeways at 12:00 PM on October 22, 2005

The coercive part is that your boss always knows if you didn't give, and it colours their perception of what kind of person/cooperative employee you are.

This analogy only works if you consider matt the boss and you the employee, which is a real stretch, cause matt ain't paid me jack.
posted by justgary at 12:03 PM on October 22, 2005

Actually, my font was just set too small. Now I'm starting to appreciate the complexities of Garamond. Although Comic Sans is kind of fun too. Thanks boaz!

Totally kidding
posted by loquax at 12:03 PM on October 22, 2005

Thanks for starting this thread, dame.

If I hadn't been minutes from leaving the house a couple days ago, when Matt closed that thread it would have been me making the above post.

There are two issues:

1. I also thought it was a shitty contest. That people were good sports, that charity money was raised, that it was done with the best of intentions, doesn't change the essential fact that it was a concept that laughed-and-grinned at squabbling, pettiness and shut-them-up vindictiveness. Obviously the contest is over, we should "move on", but I do think that there's a place (on MeTa at least!) to discuss these issues. It's important for the site that we talk through concerns, and it was not just amberglow and matteo who felt gross about the whole thing. I've been a member for almost five years and I found myself very unpleasantly surprised by the concept.

2. I was also really frustrated by Matt's closing of the thread. Despite what you say here, there was no indication in that thread that you were closing it because you preferred that the discussion continue elsewhere: instead you essentially said "this conversation is over". I think that was a disservice to the community, contrary to your usual magnanimity, and while I can appreciate that you felt stung when some members criticised your (very well intentioned) contest, I think you were wrong to impose a cone of silence on the topic.

Finally, I'm also disappointed in the intentional thread-jacking going on here. People talk about the problem with "chatty" MeTa threads; IMHO the problem is not the occasional post whose subject is overly chatty, rather when worthy MeTa posts such as this one (which can benefit from being talked-through) are hijacked by peanut-tossers. This thread is made useless by the diversions, and what's worse, that's the point.

I lose a lot of respect for people whose contributions I otherwise like a lot (eg: .kobayashi., jessamyn, scody, languagehat) when they don't just make whimsical snarks but actually contribute to shutting down (important) discussion. It's like a filibuster of crap.

(MetaFilter: It's like a filibuster of crap.)
posted by Marquis at 12:11 PM on October 22, 2005

I understand what people are saying about Matt using coercive tactics to cause dios and Rothko to agree with this contest. It COULD be construed as Matt using his power as site admin/creator to "lean" on them.

BUT, and this is huge, both participants claimed no pressure was exerted upon them. Further, and this is more important, what type of pressure could Matt possibly exert on any of us, really? I say this as a fan of this site and a fan of Matt, but really, who the fuck is Haughey, anyway? What could he possibly do to ANY of us that could hurt us in any way? Ban us? Please... Not respond to feature requests? Be less likely to agree with etiquette issues, should they arise? I mean, come on... Matt's one guy here. He has about as much influence over people's behavior as most anyone else here...which is to say, almost none.

The overreaction to this contest and subsequent MeTa threads that seek to publicize Matt's "creepy, icky behavior" once again seems like a witchhunt. Maybe the contest wasn't in the greatest taste. Perhaps it did "pit two people" against each other. But most people had fun (including the participants), no real harm was done, and a lot of money was raised for a good cause. So for the sake of civility, put in your two cents if you must, but please, no more than two cents, because it's falling upon deaf ears and creating a far more belligerent atmosphere here than the contest ever did.
posted by SeizeTheDay at 12:13 PM on October 22, 2005

Regarding the "pitting people against eachother" issue, this seems more like two people pitting themselves against eachother. And since the two people in question usually pit themselves against eachother, the only difference here is that they're pitting themselves against eachother in a novel way. I'd rather dios and rothko pit themselves against eachother for charity than for the usual bickering. And I'd rather people join in with the pitting by putting money in a fund than in sniping eachother in threads. That may be why I don't find this offensive.
posted by Bugbread at 12:25 PM on October 22, 2005

it was not just amberglow and matteo who felt gross about the whole thing

Not to sound disrespectful, but is everything Matt does supposed to make everyone feel warm and fuzzy?

A group of consenting adults all worked together to pull off a gag. It was in the spirit of fun, and money for a good cause was raised. It didn't affect the daily operation of the site in any way, and everyone involved participated voluntarily.

Some who observed it from afar claim that this is all somehow going to infect our culture with destructive vibes, and some even claim to be having spasms because it took place. I don't know what any of y'all expect anyone else to do about that. I "feel gross" about a lot of what goes on here. I don't drop that in anyone's lap as reason for them to change their behavior. Don't like it? Don't participate.

dame is right to open this thread - it can and should be talked about if people want to. But that other thread was pretty skullfucked (talk about bad vibes) and was ripe for closure. Airing complaints and reactions is healthy - that thread was not.
posted by scarabic at 12:32 PM on October 22, 2005

I'll pay $50 to make everyone shut up about this.
posted by odinsdream at 12:33 PM on October 22, 2005

For the people who think this thread was necessary: The original contest thread is still open. You're free to post there. (And maybe Matt should have posted his update there as well).
posted by klangklangston at 12:49 PM on October 22, 2005

when they don't just make whimsical snarks

Marquis, my friend, I'll take whimsy over overweening sanctimony any day of the week, if only to deflate some of the self-importance that's been poisoning the air around here.
posted by jonmc at 12:51 PM on October 22, 2005

I had french toast this morning.

With maple syrup.
posted by konolia at 12:52 PM on October 22, 2005

If I ran a website and some schmuck opened a third thread on a topic after I'd pointedly closed two, I'd ban him immediately.

But then, if I slapped down a well-reasoned argument about how I had banned someone else because all he ever did was fuck around and post noise, I wouldn't turn around and reactivate his account the next day. So I suppose it's just as well that I don't run any websites.

(Roger Clemens sucks.)
posted by cribcage at 12:53 PM on October 22, 2005

I sincerely hope we get a meta callout every time someone thinks raising money for a good cause is done in an "icky" way. Seriously. Better yet, I hope we get TWO, cause one 60+ comment shitpile obviously wasn't enough. Even the people you're pretending to stand up for thought it was a good idea done in good fun. The only time things got weird and distressing is after matteo and amberglow started in with their bullshit.

fuck
this
thread.
posted by shmegegge at 12:54 PM on October 22, 2005

I can’t forgive Roger Clemens for getting all fat and recalcitrant and seemingly over-the-hill in Boston and then miraculously resuming his trajectory as one of the best pitchers of all time after leaving the Red Sox.
posted by found missing at 12:59 PM on October 22, 2005

2 words: whiny bitches.
posted by eyeballkid at 1:04 PM on October 22, 2005

These MeTa threads are just increasing the rate at which my desire to participate in this community is waning.
posted by trey at 1:12 PM on October 22, 2005

Lotsa people participate w/o reading MeTa at all. You could join them pretty easily.
posted by Mid at 1:21 PM on October 22, 2005

These MeTa threads are just increasing the rate at which my desire to participate in this community is waning.

unfortunately, trey, the way this place is run is decreasing my desire to participate. and while i don't agree with the amberglow or matteo have handled this, the competition was, for me, yet one more example of the way "community policing" has become something surprisingly ugly.

for the last month or so i stopped posting here because i was so tired of the intolerance shown to people who expressed opposing views. i can understand, i think, matt's motivation for running this competition but, as i tried to explain earlier, i'm worried that it's not as innocent as it seems.

on the other hand, what's the alternative? heavy handed moderation is also annoying (and increasingly common). matt is damned either way.

i think running a site like this is hard, and matt's ability to do so over time more than compensates - as i've said before - for the technical flaws. i consider myself moderately adept at fixing technical flaws, but i have no idea how to solve the problems that are growing here.

when i started writing this i thought i was going to make a case for this discussion somehow increasing my desire to participate here. i've failed to do that. sorry.
posted by andrew cooke at 1:28 PM on October 22, 2005

Rainy here and I didn't get to go for a bike ride today.
posted by fixedgear at 1:37 PM on October 22, 2005

Well, when you have a clique of users who reflexively oppose any attempt to decrease the asshole quotient (be it by banning, probationing, or deleting flamebait), the only thing one can rationally assume is that those users want carte blanche to be assholes.

Face it, the Every Post Is Sacred contingent isn't really opposed to silencing users or shutting down discussions, pious protestation or not; they just want control over which users get silenced and which discussions get shut down. And they won't take it to a new site because building a user base is hard, and who would be around to admire their brilliant posts then?
posted by darukaru at 1:50 PM on October 22, 2005

It rained earlier, briefly; I went to the library and caught up on some reading, then on the way home stopped in at the friends of the library booksale (scored another Mikis Theodorakis LP! \o/ ) and now it's dinner and a party. And you? How have you been?
posted by Tuwa at 1:52 PM on October 22, 2005

Marquis, my friend, I'll take whimsy over overweening sanctimony any day of the week, if only to deflate some of the self-importance that's been poisoning the air around here.

Jon, I hear you - the excerpt you quoted in my piece was actually an attempt to express that "whimsical snarks" are good, but that people ought to recognise when they cross over into something else and become destructive. (Where this line lies, however, has long been a matter of debate for 9622 and quonsar-cultists alike.)

And I think you'll agree that there's a difference between talking about something seriously (where there may not be humour, but there is the capacity for it), and "overweening sanctimony".

I wasn't trying to be schoolmarmy in my post; but this stuff needs to be talked about and not shouted, closed (or filibustered) down.

Not to sound disrespectful, but is everything Matt does supposed to make everyone feel warm and fuzzy?

Absolutely not. But Matt's supposed reason for closing the thread was that "everyone (but you two) are commenting favorably on it ... it's getting tiresome for everyone to explain why you guys seem out of line." And I wanted to make it clear that not only was that a bad reason to close the thread - it was a reason founded on an incorrect assumption.
posted by Marquis at 1:54 PM on October 22, 2005

Tuwa! :P
posted by Marquis at 1:54 PM on October 22, 2005

The lack of color on the trees is definitely related to the dry summer. It's tough on the leaf peepers, but I for one like the muted palette. Besides, two of our three euonymus bushes are blazing red, which makes a nice contrast with the reddish-brown redbud sapling we put in behind them. (Why isn't the bush in the middle red like the others? Who knows?) Furthermore, I'd like to say that maple syrup is delicious.

Topic? I thought the topic was Roger Clemens, but if you want to talk about this boo-hoo-Matt's-oppressing-us stuff: I disapproved of the original idea (you can check the thread for the exact tenor of my whining), but frankly, it's not that big a deal, especially since all the principals are fine with it, so I've gotten over it. I suggest the rest of you kick back and watch the Series tonight and forget this nonsense.

Euonymus means 'of good name, lucky' in Greek; according to the OED, "Pliny says that the flowering of the euonymus was a presage of pestilence; hence it seems probable that the name ‘lucky’ was given with euphemistic intention." It's also called burning bush in the US and spindle-tree, pegwood, prickwood, and skewerwood in the UK. Gosh, I like words.
posted by languagehat at 2:03 PM on October 22, 2005

Marquis! [looks around guilitily at his filibustering]....

Erm, from what I've seen from the other threads, the talk has been a bit ... tense, I guess I'd say, and didn't strike me as likely to be too produtive. I think there's a real defensiveness and even some animosity on display from different quarters and my hopes of this thread (like the previous ones about the same topic and, probably, like any later ones about the same topic) are quite low. Maybe you're right that the correct response was to ignore it rather than to indulge in threadjacking.
posted by Tuwa at 2:03 PM on October 22, 2005

Face it, the Every Post Is Sacred contingent isn't really opposed to silencing users or shutting down discussions, pious protestation or not; they just want control over which users get silenced and which discussions get shut down.
No, we're unhappy that the owner/operator/moderator/etc of a community site that's devoted to discussion of web stuff held a contest in which the whole point was to give money to shut up a member, and the result was that a member had his voice taken away for a week. It doesn't matter who won (and winning isn't really the right term at all).
posted by amberglow at 2:36 PM on October 22, 2005

OK amberglow that's a pretty good a summary of why you are unhappy. I think most of us would view the contest as humorous, but you are apparently more concerned with Matt's psuedo-censorship than a brief moment of levity on MetaTalk. Can't say that I agree, but that's what makes MeTa such a fucked up wonderful place.

Pass the maple syrup, someone?
posted by Happydaz at 3:03 PM on October 22, 2005

amberglow : "No, we're unhappy that the owner/operator/moderator/etc of a community site that's devoted to discussion of web stuff held a contest in which the whole point was to give money to shut up a member, and the result was that a member had his voice taken away for a week."

I think, more accurately phrased, that should say this:

No, we're unhappy that the owner/operator/moderator/etc of a community site that's devoted to discussion of web stuff held a contest in which the whole point was to give money to shut up a member, and the result was that a member gave up his voice for a week.

posted by Bugbread at 3:16 PM on October 22, 2005

As theories go, the idea that Matt coerced them into agreeing to do this thing is pretty uncharitable. And not a little paranoid. And without evidence.
posted by scarabic at 3:20 PM on October 22, 2005

As theories go, the idea that Matt coerced them into agreeing to do this thing is pretty uncharitable. And not a little paranoid. And without evidence.

Hey, if he says he didn't, then by conspiracy theory logic he must have! QED.
posted by darukaru at 3:29 PM on October 22, 2005

Hmm. Interesting. I'm not at all upset that the "prize" was for someone to be quiet. Nor do I think in any way that they were coerced. I just think that making us all happily revel in such a competetive, "pick your team" kind of thing is awful for discussion and MetaFilter in general. A few days before, Matt was (rightfully) complaining about knee-jerk responses, and it's long been a problem in political arguments (everywhere) that people don't reconsider their own views and rather just smear the opposition. MetaFilter doesn't have "sides" - there's no real "right" or "left", no MeFi political parties, - and that's wonderful: we're each individuals. But something like this destroys that ideology.

I don't think I would have had nearly as much of a problem if it had been one poster chosen, rather than two in competition. Or if the people selected hadn't been such straw-men poster-boys for MeFi "liberals" or "conservatives". But they were, and just looking at matteo's thread, it's clear how much that aspect infiltrated MeFi/Meta's discourse, and peoples' conception of the events.
posted by Marquis at 3:35 PM on October 22, 2005

There is nothing so harmless that this crowd cannot find a problem with it.

Ten tons of talk on a two ounce subject.

And if any of you are on Ebay, check and see if they have a sense of humor up for bid. A few people here could use one.
posted by konolia at 4:09 PM on October 22, 2005

No senses of humor. Some dude's virginity's for sale, though. And salt.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 4:27 PM on October 22, 2005

jesus christ who cares
posted by Optimus Chyme at 4:27 PM on October 22, 2005

I think the solution is obvious:
Ban me, and when an undisclosed sum of ransom is reached, i will be set free.
or quonsar.
posted by philida at 4:28 PM on October 22, 2005

Matt deleted 204 of quonsar's comments for nothing.

I bet most of them were more entertaining than anything Alex or dios ever wrote.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 4:35 PM on October 22, 2005

And by "for nothing" I of course mean "for no monetary compensation for himself or others".
posted by mr_crash_davis at 4:36 PM on October 22, 2005

Frankly, I'm impressed that either one of the guys is "celebrity" enough to have enough "pull" to roust up five hundred bucks worth of charity. I really doubt my name would have done it.

Pretty good reward for (being a troll) | (being a popular writer). I'm not sure which.
posted by five fresh fish at 6:07 PM on October 22, 2005

Am I the only one who doesn't think the contest went far enough? I didn't pitch in, because a week of silence is trivial. I might pay to have someone silenced for a month. Naturally, it would have to involve a banning of their IP address so they couldn't pay $5 and come back with another account.
posted by bingo at 6:36 PM on October 22, 2005

Well, AR is some kind of network admin and I assume he's got the wherewithal to gin up an entirely new IP address if he really wanted to go back on his freely-entered-into agreement. Part of the reason this will have worked, if it does so, is just that voluntary nature of the whole affair.

AlexReynolds: He's read the RFCs.
posted by kenko at 7:19 PM on October 22, 2005

My niece Harper turned 1 today!
posted by hall of robots at 7:21 PM on October 22, 2005

RsFC, I guess. I'll take two Whoppers Jr. while I'm here.
posted by kenko at 7:21 PM on October 22, 2005

I don't WANT to be exposed to diaper.

Thanks, I'll be here for another hour or so.
posted by kenko at 7:23 PM on October 22, 2005

kenko, seems like RFCs is the expression used, though I respect what you're trying to do with RsFC.
posted by bingo at 7:56 PM on October 22, 2005

There's only one thing I'm absolutely certain of, and that's that Dios and Rothko are both laughing their asses off right now.

I think I have a solution, anyway, that will satisfy everyone. All the people who are vehemently opposed to this contest, show your support and solidarity to "The Mefi Two" in the following manner: One, add a final comment to this thread in the form of a "moment of silence" period (.). Second, elect to remain silent for the next week. It will send a powerful message. So very, very powerful.
posted by nanojath at 8:44 PM on October 22, 2005

LarryC, you should go talk to John Martin. That will save this thread.
posted by peacay at 10:53 AM PST on October 22 [!]

My name's John Martin! I'm here to save this thread!


Sorry I'm late.
posted by The Great Big Mulp at 9:02 PM on October 22, 2005

I don't think the contest was a big deal, but I do agree that it was kind of creepy. Much better if it had been an informal agreement that didn't include official site participation.

mathowie: That's not coercion.
...
even I have a much higher opinion of both

So, maybe 'coercion' isn't the perfect word, but...

There are a pair of great Ideas programs from last year on Authority and Coercion.
posted by Chuckles at 9:45 PM on October 22, 2005

GO ASTROS OVERALL THEY HAVE THE CUTER PLAYERS AND I LIVE IN HOUSTON AND HAVE BEEN WAITING FORTY YEARS AND ITS ALL ABOUT ME SO THERE AND IT'S STILL CAPS LOCK DAY SO DON'T KICK MY DOG AND TELL ME FUCKOFF.
posted by WolfDaddy at 9:51 PM on October 22, 2005

I previously said: Much better if it had been an informal agreement

Looks like that isn't how it went down at all...
posted by Chuckles at 10:02 PM on October 22, 2005

dame is right to open this thread - it can and should be talked about if people want to.

Let's see. Matt announces the contest and members make their complaints known. Matt announces the winner and the same members continue to complain. Another thread is started by one of those same complaining members. Finally, this thread is created dripping with sarcasm. I'm sure matt has less whining to deal with at home.

but I do agree that it was kind of creepy

What's creepy is how serious people take a website. But they should be happy now. I'll bet matt wouldn't touch a similar contest with a ten foot pole.
posted by justgary at 10:18 PM on October 22, 2005

What's creepy is how serious people take a website. But they should be happy now. I'll bet matt wouldn't touch a similar contest with a ten foot pole.

Indeed!

Personally, I'd like to take a moment to submit a feature request here: can we make a tip jar for every account on the site, and at a certain point when enough money (let's call it x dollars) has been added, suspend the account for x hours?

Of course the money could go to EFF or CC, but regardless of how the money was used it would be fun. It would give everyone a chance to put their money where their mouth is WRT telling people to shut up.

Matt, the contest rocked. Had I been eating cereal when I saw it, I would've shot milk out of my nose.
posted by mullingitover at 10:35 PM on October 22, 2005

Why did dame open this thread and then not take part in the ensuent discussion?

Though, really, who cares.

And I think they have to be sugar maples, not just any old maples.
posted by Rumple at 12:27 AM on October 23, 2005

Coercion IS a reasonable word to use, as in: the word(s) coming from an authority induces the hearer to reinterpret all or parts of the message in the context of that authority.

That concept was hammered into my head when I was at uni, learning to manage people in the workplace, and it's true; a person in charge of others has to be careful making suggestions or requests. The weight of the authority we have over others is always part of the communication we have with those others. It's not paranoia to be aware of this.

I wonder if Chuckles' links above address that. I'll check the links later, thanks.

I may be shutting up now. :)
posted by reflecked at 2:42 AM on October 23, 2005

I had sort of mixed feeling about the contest... but then I have mixed feelings about most things.

I'm just dropping in to say that what's interesting to me is that both rothko and dios have made recent efforts to tone down the heat and try to avoid Big Drama, and think that's very cool... and, if nothing else, the contest did actually demonstrate that neither of them takes himself as seriously as many have imagined.

I just really hope that people will try to resist the temptation of "how much to shut you up this time" cracks if they find themselves in a disagreement with either one in the future. Let's try to disprove the "no good deed goes unpunished" rule.
posted by taz at 3:04 AM on October 23, 2005

Hey, I'm just here for the $50. That's USD, right?
posted by deborah at 3:07 AM on October 23, 2005

This place reminds me of high school more and more each day.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 5:10 AM on October 23, 2005

Civil_Disobedient : "This place reminds me of high school more and more each day."

Reminds me less of high school, and more of university (high school was generally free of Outrage, but we had so much experience with Outrage in Uni that I think they should have given us all honorary degrees in it).
posted by Bugbread at 5:54 AM on October 23, 2005

*gives Civil_Disobedient an atomic wedgie*
posted by taz at 6:01 AM on October 23, 2005

I still can't believe Clemens's arm blew out in the second inning. Well, it's only one game.

And baseball is a hell of a lot more interesting than hashing out the details of the possible ethical implications of a website contest for the thousandth time. But whatever turns you on.
posted by languagehat at 6:42 AM on October 23, 2005

I now believe Clemens has moved all the bright foliage from New England to New York. The bastard. I hear the colors are good in the Alastor system now; maybe I'll go there.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 6:53 AM on October 23, 2005

No one's asking the obvious question:

jonmc, just what is it about Kool Aid Man that you find vaguely erotic?

It's the dimples, isn't it? Gotta be the dimples.
posted by Fuzzy Monster at 7:49 AM on October 23, 2005

scody: "Go White Sox Go White Sox Go White Sox Fuck Roger Clemens Go White Sox Go White Sox GO YOU SOX GOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>

Hey, it worked, and I had maple syrup on my french toast this morning.
posted by SteveInMaine at 8:23 AM on October 23, 2005

I just think that making us all happily revel in such a competetive, "pick your team" kind of thing is awful for discussion and MetaFilter in general.

Making us? For one thing, Matt and dios and Rothko and all the supporters of the idea obviously couldn't make anyone happily revel, or we wouldn't have had a series of clusterfuck threads on the subject.

However, by appearances the strong majority of us did indeed revel happily in this event, and I would guess that there was a unifying theme for the revelers quite apart from the one you perceive: we appreciate the absurdity of the thing.

The contest is not (except superficially) about silencing a member. It is about self-reflection. It is about awareness of our own collective tendency toward petty bickering and escalating argument. The contest is a way to frame something unpleasant about the site and community in a fresh light and reveal the absurdity of The Drama.

How is it awful for discussion? People have referenced the likely appearance of "how much to make YOU shut up" comments. And? If we trade in one snarky meme for another for the next month, we'll have neither gained nor lost ground. The contest, in all it's philanthropic frivolity, was a riff on the snarkery that already exists.

How, then, is it awful for Metafilter in general? Metafilter will have gone from being a snarky-but-redeemable site with some highly visible users to being the same sort of place but one that has raised a bit of money for a charity through an act of light-hearted self-reflection.

Weep for the coersion of Rothko and dios if you (the collective matteo-amberglow-and-sympathizers "you") really must, but they were not feeling used; unless you believe they are so profoundly unperceptive (an idea this very contest has hepled combat) that they couldn't tell for themselves, you are trying to suffer for them by proxy, which is ridiculous. And if you do think they're that profoundly unperceptive, your otherwise-acute sense of charity is null and void.

/rant
posted by cortex at 8:56 AM on October 23, 2005

Now that's the postseason Clemens that I remember!
posted by .kobayashi. at 9:23 AM on October 23, 2005

unless you believe they are so profoundly unperceptive (an idea this very contest has hepled combat) that they couldn't tell for themselves, you are trying to suffer for them by proxy, which is ridiculous.

Well, duh, that's the magic of the globalized capitalist media conspiracy death machine, you're being coerced all the time and you're kept too dumb and cosseted to realize it! Only the intervention of the Enlightened Ones can free humanity from their super-comfy shackles of ignorance.
posted by darukaru at 9:25 AM on October 23, 2005

Oh! Oh! I've got a good one. Let's have a 'grammar jar', and if you put your quarters in, because you saw your own mistake after posting, before anyone corrects you, anyone that does so after gets like double-fined or banned or you know, whatever.
posted by Mr T at 9:38 AM on October 23, 2005

It wasn't Clemens' arm, 'twas his hamstring, which makes him doubtful for the rest of the series. Which isn't as worrisome to me now as his last 20 or so starts have been less than the magnificence he brought earlier in the season. If Pettitte and Oswalt crash'n'burn, though, we're screwed.

This. IS. SportsFilter.
posted by WolfDaddy at 9:57 AM on October 23, 2005

Every now and then, I forget why I hate baseball so much, and then someone reminds me...
posted by hototogisu at 10:22 AM on October 23, 2005

Why did dame open this thread and then not take part in the ensuent discussion?

I said most of what I needed to say in the post. And Marquis said a lot of the rest. Frankly, though I think the contest is disgusting, I was more pissed off by Matt essentially saying, "No one agrees with you. Shut up," and then closing the thread so no one could disagree with him.
posted by dame at 10:32 AM on October 23, 2005

Why did dame open this thread and then not take part in the ensuent discussion?

YHBT. HAND.
posted by dersins at 10:48 AM on October 23, 2005

*drags Civil_Disobedient into the girls restroom and gives him a swirlie*
posted by deborah at 10:49 AM on October 23, 2005

We really need another contest asap.
posted by justgary at 11:03 AM on October 23, 2005

Wise words from dame, in my opinion. MetaTalk is definitely serving a purpose if it keeps arguments out of MetaFilter and AskMetaFilter. 1/3 of MetaTalk might be stinking infested crud as a result, but if that 1/3 can be contained in specific threads, that's all the better. Sometimes it is better just to let it out rather than have people go looking for other threads in which to vent. I know it's extremely disheartening to have nay-sayers rain on positive ideas, but the real trick is not to give a damn and carry on regardless.
posted by nthdegx at 11:07 AM on October 23, 2005

It wasn't Clemens' arm, 'twas his hamstring

Yeah, my bad. I hate having to root for Petitte now, he was on the hated Yankees so long, but I guess I'll do it. Also, how does he continue to look 14 years old? Is there a Portrait of Andy Petitte in the commissioner's office, ready to be destroyed if he gets out of line?

I had maple syrup on my french toast this morning. Bacon, too. Mmm, fried pig fat...
posted by languagehat at 11:29 AM on October 23, 2005

languagehat: Sox in six. This changes everything.
posted by WolfDaddy at 11:48 AM on October 23, 2005

I'll pay $500 to close the whole site for a week.
posted by Joeforking at 12:27 PM on October 23, 2005

nthdegx, but dame conveniently fails to mention that there was already a thread for this. and 2 OTHER superfluous threads besides this one that were legitimately closed because THE FIRST ONE WAS STILL ON THE FRONT PAGE AT THE TIME OF THIS THREAD'S POSTING.

mathowie is right. endless repetition of the same flimsy argument in 3 threads is nothing less than absurd.

it's clear that matteo and amberglow are disgusted, and we'll miss them when they leave.
posted by shmegegge at 12:31 PM on October 23, 2005

Shmegegge, I was objecting to the reason Matt gave in that thread. Here, he gave a different reason. If he had given that reason, I would have thought the timing poor but overall reasonable. Also, it's clear that matteo & amberglow aren't the only disgusted ones.
posted by dame at 12:49 PM on October 23, 2005

Could someone point me to any post dame has made that wasn't grouching about something?
posted by konolia at 1:10 PM on October 23, 2005

So we have a very vocal minority that has an issue with the contest. They think it was bad. And then we've got an (apparently -- I haven't done a careful census of comments or anything, but it seems pretty clear) entertained and/or impressed majority who have no issue with the contest. This became clear pretty damn quickly in the prior threads. There wasn't really much of anything to learn after the first one, in fact -- positions were stated strongly, and another contest wasn't in the works even before the ensuing shitfest, so far as I can tell.

So if you've got two groups, and one group -- the group to which all the principals of the event belong -- thinks something was for a good cause and fun and just a one-off lark, and the other group -- presumably not involved except as vocal bystanders -- thinks it was terrible and awful and the beginning of a dark trend, what kind of conversation is going to be had? The contest-is-bad group already feels they have been shit on, that is clear. It's also clear to me that the contest-is-good people, and Matt in particular, are being actively and willfully shat on by the other group, which seems fucked up and vengeful in a way that the complainers really ought to recognize.

"Of course I pissed all over your shoes! You were being rude! Don't walk away from me! I'm not done pissing on your shoes yet!"

You didn't like. Fine. That's really goddam clear, and has been for a few threads. It's over, though. It happened, and it's safe to say it's unlikely to happen ever again.
posted by cortex at 1:21 PM on October 23, 2005

nthdegx, but dame conveniently fails to mention that there was already a thread for this. and 2 OTHER superfluous threads besides this one that were legitimately closed because THE FIRST ONE WAS STILL ON THE FRONT PAGE AT THE TIME OF THIS THREAD'S POSTING.

That's entirely fair. I didn't see Matt's comment to that effect, nor did I see the previous posts. I take it back.
posted by nthdegx at 2:38 PM on October 23, 2005

WAIT I THINK I MISSED IT IS JONMC GOING TO BE ON QUEER EYE OR NOT?
oops. wrong thread. sorry.
posted by philida at 4:41 PM on October 23, 2005

oops. totally wrong thread. sorry. really.
what i meant to say was i think all points by the people who have them have been made if anyone has a sincere interest in actually reading this site and searching it out. unless anyone else hasn't had time to make them yet, then they do now because of this post. sorry. thanks.
posted by philida at 4:46 PM on October 23, 2005

and gives him a swirlie

I have no idea what this means, but it sounds vaguely raunchy and more fun than an atomic wedgie, so I approve.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 9:23 PM on October 23, 2005

C_D: when one flushes a toilet, one may well observe that the water does not merely fall out the bottom but exits via a characteristic "swirling" pattern. The objective, then, of a Swirlie, is to help some other party, willing or otherwise, to observe this phenomenon at extremely close range.
posted by cortex at 9:29 PM on October 23, 2005

Game 2 was one helluva game, wasn't it?
posted by .kobayashi. at 9:31 PM on October 23, 2005

dame,

so what? his pre-closing comments aren't always perfect. It seems to me that a little thought before opening a third meta thread on a topic would prevent superfluous threads, despite God King's apparent imperfections.

eh, but maybe I'm being too harsh. I see what bugs you, and it's not like you're trying to start a fight.

I still think this thread is a cold sore on the lip of metafilter, though.
posted by shmegegge at 11:35 PM on October 23, 2005

cortex:
oh.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 5:09 AM on October 24, 2005

Don't make me post the pic of the retarded kid running/arguing over the internet crap, 'cause y'all know who deserves to see it.
posted by furtive at 8:42 PM on October 24, 2005