Comments on: How do I make a good Metafilter post?

How do I make a good Metafilter post?

MiHail — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:48:17 -0800

Dear Metafilter:
I would like to know EXACTLY what constitutes a good post. I am a long term reader, shorter-term member (coming up on a year) and just about every topic I've posted or proposed, every comment that I've made, whatever, has somehow not fit the "Metafilter" guidelines. Well, I've read the guidelines. I've read what I think good posts are and I am trying to emulate them. And yet every single time I post ANYTHING it is criticized for being too (fill in the blank).

My conclusion: this is a club. Club members posting whatever they want are OK. Nonclub members posting are (a) ripped to shreds for the WAY (not the content) they post; when they try to improve item (a) they are told that (b) the CONTENT is not appropriate.

However, if I found some stupid game where I can make George W. Bush flash Osama Bin Laden, well, THAT's worthwhile because THAT's most certainly "the best of the web".

Yes, I'm mad. The last straw has been laid on the camel's back and my ability to say "oh well" and "maybe next time" and "laugh it off" has now evaporated.

However, I guess it hasn't been completely smushed to oblivion because I am here, having once again read everything I'm supposed to, carefully followed suggestions given to me, tried to find something interesting that many don't often give thought to (and that I've been thinking about a lot lately), and am told that (SURPRISE!) my post was wrong in some way.

I should think I'm past the hazing period. However, it seems that the club is impenatrable. So let's lay it out here: WHAT IS A GOOD POST?

Please don't tell me to "take it personally." At this point, I AM FRICKIN' TAKING IT PERSONALLY.

(and thank you to other posters who have gone on to discuss my recent FPP in the vein in which it was meant.)

By: Robot Johnny

Robot Johnny — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:49:54 -0800

You might want to duck before someone throws a "more inside" your way... Club rules and all.

By: Eideteker

Eideteker — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:50:00 -0800

FRIST PSOT@~!

By: Eideteker

Eideteker — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:50:13 -0800

Curse you, Robot Johnny!

By: ThePinkSuperhero

ThePinkSuperhero — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:52:51 -0800

Girl you need to caaaaaaaaaaaaalm down.

By: Kwantsar

Kwantsar — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:52:51 -0800

Here's three ground rules:
1. Don't advocate.
2. Use CAPS sparingly.
3. If your post is long, post the long part as the first comment.

PS-- If you can't figure out why the mushroom post sucked, I'd suggest lurking for awhile, and trying to figure it out for yourself.

PPS-- Unclench.

By: my sock puppet account

my sock puppet account — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:54:23 -0800

Sit quietly, shut up for a while, see how other people do it, and emulate what people seem to think are the good ones (or avoid the pitfalls of the bad ones). For instance, if you sat quietly and observed for a while you would've noticed Matt's post in Metatalk about Crunchland's user page which has some great advice on making a post.

By: BackwardsCity

BackwardsCity — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:54:56 -0800

This is going to be a shame.

By: Gator

Gator — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:56:35 -0800

MiHail, I think it's naptime for you again.

You say you've read the guidelines -- great. Have you read the Wiki? Particularly the What Is A Good Post page? Particularly the "Keep your ego out of it" part?

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:58:45 -0800

It helps to complain a lot and blow things way out of proportion.

By: dorian

dorian — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:59:49 -0800

because this will end well.

By: panoptican

panoptican — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:59:51 -0800

You talk too much. I'm newer than you and I've made eleven posts so far. Most of them were well-received. Let the links talk for themselves. What you say should just give some idea to MeFites what the links contain. It's not a club and it's certainly not nice. If you enjoy MetaFilter, you're going to have to accept that a pretty large percentage of users are trying as hard as possible to make the snarkiest comment possible.

Also, mushrooms. Mushrooms, mushrooms, mushrooms, mushrooms!

By: my sock puppet account

my sock puppet account — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:00:27 -0800

After looking at your most recent post; your first link is to the Wikipedia and your second link is broken. What were you expecting to happen?

By: bonaldi

bonaldi — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:00:56 -0800

you're taking this personally? OK: shut the fuck up on the front page! jesus wept, your book, er, post was longer than that time I had to write out the phone directory as punishment in music class for daring to do a paradiddle when I should have been doing 4/4 time on the drums.

i mite be drunk, but that's no excuse for loquaciousness. It is for not spelling that.

my conclusion: say less in the post. I wish I had here.

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:01:11 -0800

On further review, this from the Wiki is a great start:

It's generally agreed that actively looking for a story to post to MetaFilter is not a good idea; on the contrary, serendipity plays a large part in good posts, and it can't be hurried.

By: yhbc

yhbc — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:01:26 -0800

There is no ~~cabal~~ club.

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:03:56 -0800

I'll have a cabal sandwich. Hold the mushrooms.

By: bonaldi

bonaldi — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:04:46 -0800

I thought I might have been unfair, so I looked at your posts. They're shit.

It's about the links, not you.Not the "meat" of your post. Or even me.

By: Firas

Firas — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:05:15 -0800

Relax. You've posted 3 FPPs, of which 1 didn't quite work out. Sounds like an ok track record.

By: ThePinkSuperhero

ThePinkSuperhero — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:06:12 -0800

For reals, though, posting FPPs is not necessary. I have been here for a year, and I have posted 1 FPP. If I find something else I feel strongly about posting, I will, but it's not necessary to knock yourself out trying to make the perfect post. Anything you post, some people are gonna hate. So, um, don't take it personally.

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:07:27 -0800

Seeing that 5 of the first 11 comments in the thread or yours, it seems helpful to also mention that you shouldn't try to "moderate" the thread. I think there's a general agreement about that.

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:08:27 -0800

"are yours", dagnabbit.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:08:40 -0800

I've got a bad feeling about this.

By: teece

teece — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:08:45 -0800

My conclusion: this is a club.

You're 100% correct on that, regardless of the merits of or lack thereof of your posts.

Now, a solution? Consider your MiHail $5 a loss, and get a new account. Lurk for awhile -- stick to comments for a few months. After several to many months, you'll see all the examples of the posts which result in pile-ons, and if getting that flack really bothers you, you can learn what to avoid.

As a club, MeFites love to play pile on. If a MeFite smells blood in the water, everybody joins in and hits you, because they are glad it's not them getting hit. They want to join the cool kids.

At this point, MiHail maybe so much a "loser" in this club that I wonder if anyone will ever be decent to you.

But MeFites love to bitch about the quality of posts almost as much as anything else. It's a pastime.

By: kalimac

kalimac — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:12:04 -0800

How many people are here? Someone will always, always bitch.

It's our pride and joy. Sorta.

By: Robot Johnny

Robot Johnny — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:13:36 -0800

Metafilter: Hold the mushrooms.

By: Falconetti

Falconetti — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:14:44 -0800

I liked your post for the most part. I agree that the more inside was a tad longish and you don't need to moderate the thread so much, but it was essentially fine. I wouldn't worry about it.

Your MetaTalk posts on the other hand need some work.

By: yhbc

yhbc — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:14:49 -0800

Oh, bullshit, teece. There are no cool kids in a room where everybody involved is typing in the dark on a Saturday night, for fuck's sake.

There have been many cases of people making mistakes, or fucking up royally, and being laughed at wholeheartedly, and then coming back to do just fine. Doing something "wrong" once doesn't brand you as an outcast, because THERE REALLY IS NO FUCKING CLUB.

Doing something wrong consistently, however, has been seen to result in different outcomes.

By: teece

teece — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:15:19 -0800

I also should add: there is nothing wrong with your organ donor post. Some may disagree -- they're free to. But the only one you need to care about is Matt.

By: furtive

furtive — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:16:17 -0800

I saw an article last week and although it is talking about Slashdot.org, I think the same applies to Metafilter:

InformationWeek: What makes a good Slashdot post?

Bates: It's being able to state things well, actually being able to write and form coherent sentences, which is a surprising task for many people, far more challenging than one would think it is. But also having good links ... not just having one link to the story but if there's supporting information. This is the World Wide Web. Let's use it for that. ... The other major characteristic is trying to remove, or make obvious, bias. ... Because what we're trying to encourage is the discussion. ... I don't want to host a flame war, I want to host a discussion.

By: yhbc

yhbc — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:16:20 -0800

And yes, since you ask, I haven't used up my quota of "fucks" yet this month.

Fuck.

By: edgeways

edgeways — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:17:26 -0800

In case you missed it, I'll double up on what was said above .

Brevity, clarity, interesting, avoid politics, avoid editorializing in the FPP. Pretend you are giving a presentation to 30,000 people

By: teece

teece — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:19:09 -0800

Oh, yhbc, every community (of which MeFi is one) will have cool kids. The fact that by some other community's standards MeFites can't be cool kids is irrelevant.

Now, I don't think that MiHail ditching her account is strictly necessary: sure, she could recover. But she seems very sensitive to criticism, and MeFites are going to remember her track record for a long time, which might be a problem for her. Hence the suggestion for a clean slate.

By: MiHail

MiHail — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:19:25 -0800

I do know why the mushroom post sucked and got reamed so badly. It was deserved. As I stated I am trying to learn from my mistakes.

And what are all the political posts then? Polite conversation? From my view they are ALL advocating SOMETHING.

(Sock Puppet: I just rechecked my links and they are all working fine for me. And Gator, yes I have read Wiki and anything else I can get my hands on.)

Panopticon, congratulations. You managed to combine an insult for me with a pat on your back for yourself.

I need to go now. One of my cats knocked something over and smashed it. Too bad it didn't fall on my head.

By: Falconetti

Falconetti — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:20:27 -0800

Also, looking back at your post, only Rothko made a snarky comment, while the rest of the posts addressed your post. I don't see the why you have any reason to be so upset.

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:21:15 -0800

There are no cool kids in a room where everybody involved is typing in the dark on a Saturday night, for fuck's sake.

Ooh, that reminds me. Time to go hang with the cools. Lata-Lusers! (Commish, I asked. They said you can't come in. Something about unpronounceable names)

By: smackfu

smackfu — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:22:20 -0800

Was there a lot more in the organ donation thread that was deleted??? Because it doesn't seem like it would inspire this pointless Meta post as-is.

By: interrobang

interrobang — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:22:37 -0800

I'm starting to think that this person is doing this on purpose.

By: MiHail

MiHail — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:24:21 -0800

FYI

panoptican has posted 11 links and 118 comments to MetaFilter
and 2 threads and 23 comments to MetaTalk
and 9 questions and 98 answers to Ask MetaFilter

MiHail has posted 3 links and 111 comments to MetaFilter
and 2 threads and 12 comments to MetaTalk
and no questions and no answers to Ask MetaFilter

By: bonaldi

bonaldi — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:26:29 -0800

meow

By: Rothko

Rothko — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:26:31 -0800

Also, looking back at your post, only Rothko made a snarky comment

As an organ donor, I sympathize with the content of the post. Given the way I have been treated for a similar level of advocacy in one of my old posts, I don't think my comment can be construed as "snarky". It's simply a warning about the content of this person's post. I don't even know what the mushroom talk is about. /shrug

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:27:24 -0800

See, that's not helping.

By: Rothko

Rothko — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:27:44 -0800

Sorry: as a registered organ donor.

By: dhruva

dhruva — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:27:46 -0800

Here's my personal rule for Metafilter, especially in the early stages: NEVER draw attention to yourself. Or rather, let the link do the talking.

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:29:54 -0800

Plus, I always love it when people announce they are leaving a thread, but then, they just hang around.

That's it. I've had enough of this. I'm going to bed.

By: panoptican

panoptican — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:30:03 -0800

Just trying to prove my worth. Can I be inducted to the club now?

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:30:04 -0800

And another thing...

By: Firas

Firas — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:30:14 -0800

This is going to come across as condescending no matter how I phrase it, but it is meant as sincere advice: please try not to post any more comments in this thread, MiHail. Maybe a turn-off of the computer for a few hours is in order? You're picking fights already.

By: yhbc

yhbc — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:30:41 -0800

Don't you have someplace else to go, Monseiur Chef?

By: Uncle Glendinning

Uncle Glendinning — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:31:19 -0800

Mihail posted Sorry this is so long...but I'm really trying to redeem myself after the mushroomy mess of the other day....

May I suggest the following: do not show weakness or doubt on this here internet, whether your post is good, bad or fungal.

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:31:39 -0800

FYI

yhbc has posted 34 links and 1602 comments to MetaFilter
and 10 threads and 1022 comments to MetaTalk
and 1 question and 5 answers to Ask MetaFilter

ColdChef has posted 76 links and 2960 comments to MetaFilter
and 6 threads and 855 comments to MetaTalk
and 13 questions and 197 answers to Ask MetaFilter

By: smackfu

smackfu — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:31:51 -0800

I'll just preserve MiHail's current user page here, because otherwise it might not get noticed:

I also am a self-righteous snob (see official mushroom post designating me as such) as well as someone who uses fake illness for personal gain (same post). Altogether insufferable. I have no idea how to construct a good FP post to Metafilter, and am a yuppie to the core. My Izods are pink and my clamdiggers are green, I hold my nose high in the air so I don't have to breathe the same air as the hoi poloi, and I own a mansion and a yacht.

Furthermore, I always, in restaurant, be sure to ask, "Only Frank Tang mushroom for me, please. Others no good." If no Frank Tang mushroom, say, "Get Frank Tang best good mushroom quick or go out of my business."

Sometimes I condescend to post some of my tremendous knowledge to the rabble, but I prefer to look down my nose and read the sometimes entertaining posts of others.

By: marxchivist

marxchivist — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:31:58 -0800

There is no club.

Well, there might be a club, or a cabal, or something like that. If there is, no one has told me about it, and I certainly haven't been invited. But if there is a club, it is possible to do good posts without belonging to it. I seem to be able to post and comment in relative obscurity, and I like it that way. I think if I got noticed in a big way, it would be bad.

As panoptican said upthread, You talk too much and Let the links talk for themselves.

It appears you followed some advice and put your editorializing in your comment, but it still seems like a bit much. The mushroom thread earlier, and calling the entire community out in Metatalk did not add to the reception of your post.

By: interrobang

interrobang — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:33:20 -0800

I've posted something like thirty links, and I'm *still* waiting to be inducted into this club. Which I only just heard about tonight. By you, MiHail.

The reason you're being picked on is mainly that your formatting sucks, and you over-moderate your threads. It's as simple as that.

People have said shitty things in my posts, and I didn't come back to complain about them. That's just the way it is. There's always an asshole or two. They can be ignored, just like real assholes.

By: yhbc

yhbc — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:33:54 -0800

FYI

Soybeans were the most lucrative legal cash crop in Bolivia in the 1980s. Soybean production began in earnest in the early 1970s, following a substantial increase in the crop's world price. By the late 1980s, soybeans represented the country's most important oilseed crop.

Coffee, another principal cash crop, was the second most important agricultural export after timber. As the primary substitute crop offered to coca growers under the eradication program, coffee was of particular importance. Coffee production reached 13,000 tons in 1988, nearly double the 1987 output, which was damaged by disease in western Bolivia.

By: justgary

justgary — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:36:44 -0800

You're taking this too personal. Hell, people in this thread can't agree on what makes a good post. Don't advocate? Some of metafilter's most famous/popular members have made a career out of advocating, making basically the same post every two weeks. One of those same members has actually suggested new members run links by them to make sure they're 'worthy'.

Besides, if this link (yes, I flagged it) isn't deleted, anything goes. The filter, for all intents and purposes, is dead, only showing itself on rare occasions. Good or bad development, decide for yourself.

By: If I Had An Anus

If I Had An Anus — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:40:19 -0800

Specifically what was the last straw, MiHail?

By: marxchivist

marxchivist — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:41:41 -0800

P.S. After rereading your post and the comments, I see only one comment that could be regarded as snarky.

By: Ethereal Bligh

Ethereal Bligh — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:44:28 -0800

This demonstrates that there actually is a problem in terms of what Matt's letting slip by and what people have come to believe is a good MetaFilter post. We can say, the guide can say, the wiki can say, they all can say "it's the link, not the post" that's important but as long as a large number of people continue to make posts that are about themselves, that are things that are GYOBFW, people are going to keep thinking that MetaFilter is an op-ed forum with a huge number of readers.

It's hard to find something worth linking to after five years because all the low-hanging fruit has already been picked. If you want to find new things, then you have to do as crunchland says and have a strategy and work pretty hard to find new sites that are worth posting about. None of my posts are any good even though they weren't deleted. Anything that I've found that I've been sure would make a really good post I've discovered that someone has beaten me to it.

It doesn't seem to me that it's hard to tell the difference between a post that's about a really good website that people haven't seen before and a post that's a poster's thought-for-the-day. This isn't rocket science.

Why be so eager to post, anyway? If you want to post, then your posts are going to be about you at some level. And if that's the case, then at least have the discipline to do as crunchland does and work hard to find something worthy of posting so we can be impressed with you.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:45:37 -0800

I don't really get people who joined Metafilter to make posts, other than the possibility that they're pathetically desperate for some kind of audience. Get your own weblog for that, would be my advice.

Joining because you wanted to make comments, engage in the conversation and fun, sure. Makes sense to me. But unless you have found something really swell on the web during your wanderings, and you think MeFites'd like it, well, there doesn't seem much point in posting beyond self-gratification.

Some of metafilter's most famous/popular members have made a career out of advocating, making basically the same post every two weeks.

Those people's posts suck.

The filter, for all intents and purposes, is dead, only showing itself on rare occasions.

Nonsense. But it's assertions like that that incline people to give up on making an effort, and increase the possibility that they will post crap.

By: interrobang

interrobang — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:46:49 -0800

What Ethereal Bligh said, and this bears repeating.

By: Balisong

Balisong — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:59:29 -0800

Whatever you do, Don't make a post like mine.

That was a disaster.

By: quonsar

quonsar — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:10:46 -0800

I would like to know EXACTLY what constitutes a good post.

i would like to know EXACTLY what happens after we die. neither of us is going to get a sufficiently detailed answer. deal.

By: cribcage

cribcage — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:14:02 -0800

MetaFilter has a new drama queen.

By: rocketman

rocketman — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:14:31 -0800

It's possible you're just not very clever, like me.

By: dobbs

dobbs — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:15:32 -0800

My advice (since you asked): shut up. Stop using Metafilter FPPs to share your opinion with people. NO ONE CARES. Stop thinking people are going to Metafilter to get your opinion. Most people here already have their own opinions and like them quite fine, thank you very much.

What constitutes a good post? Simple test: imagine your link (think of a SINGLE LINK--easiest way to avoid a platform)... now imagine it's under the word LINK with no description. Now imagine that a fair number of people click that link and like it enough to come back and write, "Thanks!". If you don't think your link meets this unbelievably high standard, it is not worth posting.

Now, if you ever find such a link (and chances are you won't), link to it and it alone with a little description of what it is--NOT your opinion of what it is. Then, stay the fuck out of the thread for 5 hours.

By: y2karl

y2karl — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:20:27 -0800

They can be ignored, just like real assholes.

Until your eyes fall into the gaping maw of goatse.

By: teece

teece — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:20:35 -0800

You know, dobbs' post makes me wonder.

I think his description of what makes a good link is great. BUT. As someone else said, after 5 years of MeFi, the low-hanging fruit of the 'net is gone. If everybody followed that rule, MeFi FPP numbers would drop precipitously.

Would that be a good thing? If a site doesn't frequently update, people don't come back frequently. I really wonder if the the strictest standard for great links were met for every post, if MeFi would get updated enough to bother checking it out.

By: oddman

oddman — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:25:35 -0800

People, rothko's comments was so far from a decent snark it's hardly worth considering.

Mihail, what the hell? You made an FPP there is a discussion. Someone thanked you, a few people brought up their own anecdotes, one or two made a joke (thought there is yet the de rigeur "metafilter: x" joke). All in all a fairly vanilla affair. What the heck is the/your problem?

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:26:08 -0800

Oh come one, you've got to be kidding, teece. With several thousand active members here (call it one or two in ten of the total userbase), there's no way in hell that following the advice of everyone in this thread would do anything but make the blue better. Five or ten great links a day as opposed to 20 or 30 warmed-over hijacks from the usual sources? That would rock.

By: Rothko

Rothko — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:26:46 -0800

People, rothko's comments was so far from a decent snark it's hardly worth considering.

It's not even a snark. Imagine that.

By: y2karl

y2karl — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:29:41 -0800

Dogs are bit by little fleas
with littler fleas to bite 'em
and so on
ad infinitum.

By: MiHail

MiHail — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:30:57 -0800

Specifically what was the last straw, MiHail?

The fact that the very first post after my [MI] was a snark.
Not the snarkiest snark ever, granted. Enough, however, to push my already well-worn "I have had enough snarking" button and have it stick in the full-on "I feel sorry for myself" position.

And no, I didn't plan this post (for those who think I did). I have in just very recent days had people repeat to me the same old anti-donation cliches. Ergo, I thought "gee, I wonder how many others believe such things? Wouldn't it be a keen post to MeFi, and reach a large audience? What IS the solution to increasing donation anyway?" What I did do is spend quite a bit of time PLANNING this post so it was acceptable. Result? Snark. I was advocating a position.

Nevertheless, I'll issue a blanket apology (even to dobbs, who I am sure is rubbing his/her hands in glee) right now:
I never should have allowed this particular MeTa post to leave my keyboard; it is quite possibly worse than the mushroom post because there's no funny going on in here. Next time I will count to 10 (or 20) and apply some kind of skin thickening unguent.

I am not going to destroy MiHail as a user name. I just think I will wean myself from MetaFilter for a while (hard to do, but possible). Brush up on my snobbery profile (which was meant to be ha-ha funny), my HTML skills, my sucky formatting, my stupid posts...oh, I could go on and on but there's that risk of that button getting stuck again (I'm not sure it's not still stuck somewhere). Then some day, I'll come back for (undoubtedly) more abuse. So glad I've earned the "skinny kid with glasses whose nose bleeds easily" tag so you bigger, stronger geeks have an easy target.

Let the rejoicing begin.

Ta.

By: Eideteker

Eideteker — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:31:07 -0800

1. Snark is the stupidest word ever. It is. You can't say snark and expect to be taken seriously any more than you would believe a guy in a western was tough if he was sipping his sasparilla through a twisty straw. It just ain't happenin.
2. MiHail deserves the Paris Hilton account. Two birds, one stone. Then she can bitch about poor retail service with impunity.
3. MiHail needs to get laid. Badly. You got my number, baby.
5. is right out.

I love you all, MeFites and MeFighters! Let's all just stop hatin' on one another.

By: Falconetti

Falconetti — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:31:07 -0800

Sorry Rothko, you are correct that your comment was sincere and not snark. I must have snark on the brain.

By: quonsar

quonsar — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:32:37 -0800

there's no funny going on in here

wrong again.

By: y2karl

y2karl — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:34:06 -0800

What would Hitler snark ?

By: nanojath

nanojath — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:34:42 -0800

I hope this helps: there is something wrong inside your head. You have attached emotional importance to a very stupid and unimportant thing and it is now causing you to act like a 24 carat dumbass. In future please search for self-worth within. And keep the interminable, verbose puking of self-obsessed ramblings where they belong: in the comments of threads that have already disintegrated into anarchy.

P.S. I'm serious about the something wrong inside your head thing. You should probably be seeking professional help, or at the least posting an anonymous question to AskMe (suggestion: why am I obsessed with the opinions of random congregations of strangers?).

Oh and Stavros, old bean, that's "get your own fucking weblog. Club protocols, eh what?

By: rocketman

rocketman — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:35:24 -0800

If a site doesn't frequently update, people don't come back frequently

We'll always have MetaTalk.

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:38:19 -0800

Let the rejoicing begin.

Huzzah! And I'll see you in...oh, I give it a few hours.

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:40:00 -0800

Oh, and...what the hell:

MetaFilter: bigger, stronger geeks

By: nanojath

nanojath — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:46:53 -0800

"search for self-worth within"

Reading that made me think a nice piece of Metafilter schwag would be just a simple metafilter blue tshirt with [more inside] printed on it in white.

Actually I got to say that Cafe Press store is just not cutting it. The product needs to reflect the site design and be more ingroup reference so that the heathen are perplexed and yet intrigued. That's what makes hep.

By: y2karl

y2karl — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:47:09 -0800

There ain't no such critters. It's a contradiction in terms.

By: y2karl

y2karl — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:47:48 -0800

bigger, stronger geeks, that is...

By: Eideteker

Eideteker — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:49:04 -0800

y2karl: Whatcha bench?

By: y2karl

y2karl — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:51:00 -0800

Bigger, stronger, longer lasting be I but no geek, nay never.

By: shmegegge

shmegegge — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:55:57 -0800

I sincerely hope you mean what you said about skin thickening unguent.

I tend to write short posts about video games and science fiction, and tend in those posts not to advocate for anything but appreciation of a particular creative work.

I STILL get someone making some apathetic comment on occasion. There is no avoiding it. none. I sincerely hope that you see yourself being able to ignore it in the future.

as far as emulating posts you've liked:

is there someone who makes posts like your organ donorship post that you were trying to emulate? (besides y2karl, who gets more in thread sniping thrown his way than you could ever hope to achieve if you tried.)

By: Falconetti

Falconetti — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:57:34 -0800

karl, can you last as long as this guy.

By: interrobang

interrobang — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:01:07 -0800

I can understand taking one's post to Metafilter seriously. I know I always have. Like I've said before, a good Metafilter post is a resource pointing others to all of the available online information about something you're excited about.

What I don't undertand is taking the commentary so seriously. There are Metafilter users whose self-appointed job is to make fun of Metafilter posts. I found this out a long time ago, and it stopped bothering me soon after.

Sure, it's natural to refresh the page over and over once you've posted something. What's weird is taking it personally. Like someone said upthread, you're posting something to (at least) 30,000 veiwers. There are going to be jerks who want to hurt your feelings. There's no reason to allow them to hurt your feelings.

Your links stand for themselves. If you've found something interesting, everyone will automatically know it. But, you will still have those jerks. They can't be stopped.

On the other hand, the people who appreciate your links will either say nothing, or say that they appreciate it. Either way, your motivation to post to Metafilter should not be a desire to post something at any cost; it should rather be that you discover something, investigate it further, compose a paragraph, and then expect very few comments.

That's the often-spoken secret around here: the fewer the comments, the better the content.

By: sjvilla79

sjvilla79 — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:08:21 -0800

MiHail is actually me. Ha!

By: carsonb

carsonb — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:21:31 -0800

ne feriare feri.

By: youcancallmeal

youcancallmeal — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:22:48 -0800

MiHail is actually me. Ha!

While you sleepwalk?

Sorry. It had to be said. I'm going to sleep now.

By: Quartermass

Quartermass — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:30:39 -0800

Mihail:
In what world did that post go badly? Let's do a little content analysis for fun!

Posts questioning the way the post was constructed: 1 (Rothko's alleged 'snark' that was nothing like a 'snark')
Number of comments (not written by you) before you wrote this MetaTalk thread:4
Of those four comments, # that were positive to your post, or that added more information: 3

I don't get it. I think it was established that the biggest offender from the "mushroom" post was the way in which you were thumbing your nose at the 'unwashed masses.'

By: blue_beetle

blue_beetle — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:30:55 -0800

Metafilter: We're snarky even when we're not drunk!

By: ori

ori — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:34:31 -0800

There is no caba^H^H^H^Hclub!

By: sjvilla79

sjvilla79 — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:52:00 -0800

While you sleepwalk?

No, while I'm high on mushrooms.

By: mathowie

mathowie — Sun, 20 Nov 2005 00:24:21 -0800

chill.