Comments on: US-centric MeFi bias

US-centric MeFi bias

wilful — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 21:59:15 -0800

I just know I'm going to get beaten up for this comment, but a lot of FPPs seem to assume that the audience is entirely American, or at least North American. The level of unthinking parochialism seems to have increased recently (or maybe it's just me). The Guidelines are silent as far as I can tell on whether MeFi has a particular cultural focus or bias, is there or should there be a policy on this?

By: scarabic

scarabic — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:01:51 -0800

A policy on this? What would such a policy look like?

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:04:12 -0800

is there or should there be a policy on this?

No, no there should not.

I'm not beating you up, honest. I agree with you. But the usual and reasonable response to such complaints is that if you want to see more good posts about issues not specifically American, then you should post 'em.

Nothing wrong with bringing it up once in a while, though.

By: Astro Zombie

Astro Zombie — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:08:23 -0800

I find your query to be fundamentally un-American.

By: tweak

tweak — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:13:03 -0800

The english language is probably, in and of itself, inherently biased. What are you going to do about it?

on preview: you gotta work to balance it out!

Tangentially, I wouldn't mind seeing some posts done in other languages. It would be interesting and would also signal more elegies about the Death of MetaFilter (trademark pending).

By: tweak

tweak — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:13:48 -0800

Instead of signal, I really meant trigger, and by elegies I meant MetaTalk posts

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:14:10 -0800

I find your query to be fundamentally un-American.

Nothin' wrong with that.

By: ROU_Xenophobe

ROU_Xenophobe — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:14:23 -0800

a lot of FPPs seem to assume that the audience is entirely American, or at least North American

Don't think so. A lot of them assume that metafilter is overwhelmingly-but-not-entirely American or American+Canadian, but it's very likely that it actually is.

Policy? No. If you want to see more of a particular kind of post, spend time researching and making the posts instead of wishing someone else would.

By: mediareport

mediareport — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:19:19 -0800

wilful, you're absolutely right. While "policy" is too strong a word, there should probably be a guideline on the posting page that reminds folks not to assume their audience is solely U.S.-based. I often find I like MeFi best when it shows its international character, and we should be doing what we can to encourage that as much as possible.

By: puke & cry

puke & cry — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:23:35 -0800

A lot of mefites are amur'kin. Mystery solved.

By: mediareport

mediareport — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:29:46 -0800

Uh, that a majority of MeFites are U.S.-based isn't really in question here, y'all. What *is* in question is the unthinking assumption some Mefites make that *all* Mefites are U.S.-based. That's what wilful's obviously trying to address.

By: scody

scody — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:45:05 -0800

But how could a policy address that? What, specifically, is Matt supposed to institute here? An inability to use the abbreviations for states people might not have heard of? Seriously, I sympathize with the frustration non-North-Americans likely feel with reading the front page sometimes (it's a discussion that's been had before, and I believe it was one reason the legendary Miguel bowed out awhile back), but how's a policy supposed to do anything? "It's Metafilter policy to remember that not everyone's in America." Yeah, gotcha. Not gonna change the content of any posts, methinks. If I read a French site on a daily basis, I wouldn't expect anyone to craft their posts to accomodate my living in the U.S.

By: peacay

peacay — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:46:41 -0800

There's 2 things here to my mind.

1. Is there too much Americocentric content?
2. Are posters assuming too much esoteric American knowledge?

Sometimes I'd say yes to the first question and sometimes I either don't notice or care. You can't have a policy but announcing it in MeTa at least raises it as something to be considered. Should we positively discriminate? Nope. Best of the web is best of the web regardless of nationality. The majority of people here are American, hell the majority of content on the web is American one way or another so it's an expectation we non-Americans have when we spend time here isn't it?

The 2nd part I definitely agree about. If posters want people to actually read the material they present here then they should always consider whether or not their wording is insular, local, exclusive and/or obscure. It stops me bothering to find out more about some posts, I'll just skip them if there's nothing descriptive of the content. Adding words such as 'Senator' or 'wife of Martin L King' (ones that come to mind in recent days) or something that categorizes the subject is always helpful. It's not dumbing it down, it's being communicatively respectful.

Neither of these topics of criticism would come up often if there was less politicsfilter I daresay.

By: You Should See the Other Guy

You Should See the Other Guy — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:50:49 -0800

How is this different from anywhere else on the internet? Answer: it isn't.

By: mediareport

mediareport — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:58:30 -0800

But how could a policy address that? What, specifically, is Matt supposed to institute here?

I've already answered that in my first response.

By: puke & cry

puke & cry — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 23:09:10 -0800

amer'kins assume that they're talkin' to amer'kins.

By: weston

weston — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 23:18:27 -0800

The voice of Miguel Cardoso echoes through the halls....

By: justgary

justgary — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 23:23:06 -0800

And most post/comments assume mefi is liberal, white, and tech savvy. It use to be also mostly male, but that's changed as the number of females has risen.

Write anything you want into the guidelines. It won't change anything. More non-americans as members will.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 23:27:33 -0800

" What *is* in question is the unthinking assumption some Mefites make that *all* Mefites are U.S.-based."

OH NOES GEONORMALISM!

"there should probably be a guideline on the posting page that reminds folks not to assume their audience is solely U.S.-based."

'Please, no posts about the Superbowl, as the rest of the world doesn't care. Also, no posts about things that gay people, the religious, left-handed folks, or ninjas wouldn't care about. And please, no discussing things that are traditionally placed on high shelves, as that leaves out the shorter MeFites who can't reach them.'

By: scody

scody — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 23:28:45 -0800

mediareport, I understand your answer is this: there should probably be a guideline on the posting page that reminds folks not to assume their audience is solely U.S.-based.

But as I said, if Matt puts on the posting page, "Please remember that not everyone who reads Metafilter is in the U.S.," what's that likely to do? I certainly see no harm in it, but I also don't know exactly what it would mean. If I make a post about an art collection at Cornell University, for example, does the reminder serve to tell me that now I'm "supposed" to list Cornell's city and state in the post? If someone makes a post about a particular speech a senator gave, will it really encourage a non-USian to read the links if "(D-Ill.)" is included after the Senator's name? Or for that matter, would we have to put "Democrat from Illinois" instead, since we can't assume non-USians would know those abbreviations?

This may be coming off snarkier than I intend. I really don't mean it that way; I'm honestly just trying to determine what -- on a very practical, literal level -- those of you expect this proposed guideline/reminder will accomplish. So, to go back to my "(D-Ill.)" example, do you think all congressmen/women and senators ought to be identified by title, party, and state everytime one of them is mentioned on the front page? And shall we use abbreviations or spell them out? And how will we all come to the same understanding of this unspoken policy, if all Matt is going to do is "remind folks not to assume their audience is solely U.S.-based"?

By: planetkyoto

planetkyoto — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 23:51:36 -0800

You're right, wilful, that people forget, but it's a minor annoyance, it doesn't pile up or lead to anything else, and I don't think there's anything to be done about it.

There was a FPP a week or two ago of a clip from the Daily Show, something about the Abramoff scandal and people comparing their level of "taint." Living in a cold corner of nowhere, I don't get Comedy Central and the clip was certainly funny, so I appreciated having it called to my attention. But the first or second post, as it so often is, was someone rushing in to dismiss it, saying he had already seen it on national TV last night, implying of course that anyone who might care had likewise done so.

Just for a second it irked me, but I don't think he meant anything, so I let it go.

By: Iamtherealme

Iamtherealme — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 00:01:35 -0800

I think we should form a committee to discuss how we can be more diverse.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 00:04:34 -0800

What ever happened to that plan for a policy of terminating users who suggest new policies?

By: LarryC

LarryC — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 00:04:40 -0800

Yes, a committee! With name placards! And members chosen to represent the ethnic and gender diversity of Metafilter. We can draft position papers, which will become MeTa posts, until we arrive at consensus. I can't wait!

By: gsb

gsb — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 00:04:44 -0800

Thanks weston. Now I miss Miguel, too.

I think the non-US members should readjust their perception a little. America is the center of Empire, and like all Empires in the past the nexus of the project is an interesting place to observe its actions, obsessions and foibles. Of course this place is just a small subset of huge dataset, and probably one that's skewed a little, but it's still interesting. Well, sometimes.

By: Ritchie

Ritchie — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 00:26:35 -0800

wilful, as a fellow aussie, I certainly understand where you're coming from. I used to feel the same way. Eventually, I just got over it. I skip over the posts that are impenetrable.

We Australians can fight back by commenting in incomprehensible ocker Strine, using terms like 'clacker', 'bikkie' and 'democracy'.

By: justgary

justgary — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 00:27:54 -0800

Thanks weston. Now I miss Miguel, too.

Ahh yes, being called rednecks...good times.

(not his finest hour)

By: grouse

grouse — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 00:42:09 -0800

The voice of Miguel Cardoso echoes through the halls....

Whenever I meet someone Portuguese, I ask if they know Miguel Cardoso. They always do.

By: nthdegx

nthdegx — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 00:52:39 -0800

"if you want to see more good posts about issues not specifically American, then you should post 'em."

'kay - I'll bite. I've seen occasions when non-American content is met with dismissal in the first comments in a thread. The first comments tend to define the direction the resulting discussion takes. My recent post on Nick Robinson is an example. Okay, I was guilty of not adding context to the link for the uninitiated, but I do think it takes a special kind of arseholism to dismiss something one has no knowledge of. This is by no means an isolated example.

So yeah - I have no issue with the majority of the posts being suited to a North American audience, but I have a major issue with more marginal content being ridiculed by a small-minded minority who bark loudly enough to be perceived as a majority. Sometimes I'm surprised and disappointed who those people turn out to be...

By: Devils Slide

Devils Slide — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 01:35:59 -0800

It seems about 3/4 of Metafilter users reside in America, according to the Big Metafilter User Survey. But I'm all for a more cosmopolitan/inclusive way of doing or wording things.

Country of residence

Country Percentage

United States of America 73%
Canada 12%
United Kingdom 9%
Australia 2%
Netherlands 1%
New Zealand 1%
Japan 1%
Germany 1%
Ireland 1%
Other countries,
each less than 0.5% 4%

By: matteo

matteo — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 01:39:28 -0800

is there or should there be a policy on this?

let's move the server to Mongolia, and hire a nomadic Lamaist Buddhist administrator

By: Devils Slide

Devils Slide — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 01:39:37 -0800

Wait, those percentages add up to 105%.

By: owillis

owillis — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 01:43:05 -0800

America...
America...
America, FUCK YEAH!
Coming again, to save the mother fucking day yeah,
America, FUCK YEAH!
Freedom is the only way yeah,
Terrorist your game is through cause now you have to answer too,
America, FUCK YEAH!
So lick my butt, and suck on my balls,
America, FUCK YEAH!
What you going to do when we come for you now,
it’s the dream that we all share; it’s the hope for tomorrow

FUCK YEAH!

By: johnny novak

johnny novak — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 01:50:54 -0800

what, you're telling me he pitches the ball into the ground and then the batter can hit it behind him and still score a run. Man, that's just crazy!!!

By: Marquis

Marquis — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 01:59:54 -0800

Whoa - hold on a second. Before everyone boards the Obvious Train in order to escort wilful to Get-a-Clue-ville, he has a point.

The issue being raised is not that Americans are posting about American issues - that's totally appropriate.

The thing that's worth commenting on is the assumption, by posters, that the audience is essentially exclusively American. There are many examples of posts where they say things like "The government..." or "Your representatives...", and tons of times you see an inappropriate "our", and while the majority may not notice, the (sizable) international minority does. I find it not offensive, but just a little, I dunno, unthinking. Inconsiderate? Even that feels too strong a word. But it does kind of irritate. It's most frustrating not because I feel America's shoving around the rest of the world or anything; just that it excludes me from the conversation and makes me feel like I'm interloping on a site that isn't just based in the US, but is an American website in the sense that I can only be a tourist.

I do think a tiny bit of "policy" would go a long way. Not in terms of editing/removing posts or whatever, but just a single sentence on the (FPP) posting page, reminding people to give context, where appropriate, and that not all of MetaFilter's readers are in the US. I think that little reminder would go a really long way.

By: phaedon

phaedon — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 02:00:45 -0800

chuckle.

By: Joeforking

Joeforking — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 02:08:16 -0800

Americans? Parochial? Whouldathoughtit?

By: Iamtherealme

Iamtherealme — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 02:23:00 -0800

Don't these MeTa threads that spring up every few months serve as a reminder? It seems it does about as much good as a sentence on the posting page.

By: phaedon

phaedon — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 02:24:10 -0800

I think many people are terribly afraid of being demoted by the Darwinian scheme from the role of authors and creators in their own right into being just places where things happen in the universe.
- Daniel Dennett

By: sgt.serenity

sgt.serenity — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 02:44:17 -0800

what the fuck is this ?

I don't, however, like you, Miguel, and your self-indulgent, ostentatious MeTawhatsits, lately with bonus whining. You can leave.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 6:15 AM GMT on August 16 [!]

You had the fucking cheek to say that to migs ?
You shouldnt only be retrospectively banned for the comment , Matt should take you on a tour of every worldwide meta meetup to be publicy flogged.

Anyway the real reason migs isnt here is that he isnt migs at all - the name was just a front for this guy - remember all that talk about cigars ? notice how he hasnt been here since bagdhad was occupied ? It's all adding up.

Seriously - MIGS WAS SADDAM HUSSEIN.

That picture of the two lassies - theyre just two of udays old floozies paid to keep up the pretence.

By: johnny novak

johnny novak — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 02:45:32 -0800

what marquis said

By: LarryC

LarryC — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 02:50:44 -0800

Snarks aside, I would love to see a more international 'filter. I will try and keep that in mind when posting.

(also, Sgt.serenity rocks.)

By: funambulist

funambulist — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 02:54:36 -0800

peacay: hell the majority of content on the web is American one way or another

Hmm? sure about that? perhaps you meant the majority of the content of the web that you view is in English?

But just you wait. The Brazilians already took over friendster. It's a short step from there to WORLD WEB DOMINATION. Hahaha. Atenção!

I got no real problem with the issue here, and most of all I don't see what you can do about it other than post more international stuff, but even there you'd have to choose what can be of interest to an international audience that's mostly American and English speaking (ie. I doubt the Malaysian equivalent of a post about Supreme Court nominations would fit here, as it would on a site based in Malaysia...).

I also don't really mind all the posts about US politics and news, in fact I often find it interesting as I learn about stuff I may not have heard of (and if someone mentions the name of a politician I never heard without adding all the details I just google it, it's not such a big deal) and get a sample of the discussion that may be going on weblogs and sites I don't visit. Or TV I don't watch.

So yeah in that sense maybe I wish those who complain "but we already saw it everywhere!" would think about the rest of the audience here, at least for good posts that have some interest. And conversely, like nthdegx said, not dismiss out of hand something that has more relevance outside the US. But that's about it. The rest, what Marquis says and parochialism and overuse of NSFW tags included even for links where there's only a shadow of a boob in sight! OMG! what will the boss say!, is only a natural consequence of this site being based in the US. There's plenty of others that aren't.

By: funambulist

funambulist — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 02:57:57 -0800

(ps - regarding the NSFW, I don't mean to dismiss concerns of those who have strict rules about browsing at the workplace, it's not them making up those rules, I just find if amusing that even very tame stuff sometimes gets tagged as NSFW, that's all)

By: reflecked

reflecked — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 03:17:07 -0800

By: blag

blag — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 03:34:25 -0800

What Marquis said. Every time a post on the front page talks about "our government" or "our taxes", it becomes a little bit easier for non-Americans to think "Oh, just another American website" and not post whatever interesting-but-local subject they were going to share.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 03:45:51 -0800

Crikey, Oliver, you delurked for that? Oh, how the mighty have fallen....

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 04:07:28 -0800

America is a fascinating place, but it isn't the only such in the world. What irks is that when posters actually make the effort to widen the focus, such as nthdegx, americans make comments which deride the post. It ain't that the majority of the posts are US centric. We all know how to scroll.

IMHO, that signifies the problem most. Some of the american members are completely uninterested in events outside the empire.

Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised at this sad parochialism, but Mefi is supposed to be more intelligent than the average website.

By: keijo

keijo — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 04:13:09 -0800

For me, some of the posts are a great resource for keeping up with what's going on in the US. So I don't mind them at all, quite the contrary. But of course, a little consideration goes a long way. Non-Americans are still a sizeable minority, so not assuming in FPPs that everybody knows what you're talking about would be a nice touch.

By: nthdegx

nthdegx — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 04:36:02 -0800

cheers, dashy

By: jack_mo

jack_mo — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 04:54:04 -0800

The assumption that everyone here is from the US can be a teensy bit annoying, but if there's some US reference I don't get, I ask, and invariably someone pops up with a good explanation. This is how I know who Geraldo Rivera is! (That may not be the best example.)

Some of the american members are completely uninterested in events outside the empire.

That's true, which is why it's great when US posters are considerate enough to say 'the US government' instead of 'our government' etc.

By: The God Complex

The God Complex — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 05:04:10 -0800

Un-American, adj. Wicked, intolerable, heathenish.

By: anglophiliated

anglophiliated — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 05:13:52 -0800

Though I confess my primary attachment to Metafilter is that it’s a good way to keep up with goings on in the US, perhaps the non-Americans might provide some helpful practical clues to Ameri-centric perspective? I’ll start and hope others will add:

1) (with a nod to reflecked) Remember that a quarter to a third of your audience does not identify with you on national terms, therefore ‘our president’ is not, he’s your president! (Though, in so many ways, he’s everyone’s president, isn’t he?)

2) If we ask for clarification on some point of pop culture we are not trying to be snobs and show off the fact that we don’t own a television. We just have different programs in our countries. For instance, everything I know about Dr. Phil I learned from Metafilter and I wouldn’t have found the Daily Show without Metafilter (though it is now broadcast in the UK).

3) If you are talking about flavour of the month celebs or news stories, a lot of us will have no idea what you’re on about.

4) Those jokes about other countries where you refer to, or pun on, the one or two products that you associate with that country (maple syrup? bacon?) in reply to some more significant issue – those jokes? – everyone else in the world is rolling their eyes – like ‘all your base are belong to us’ rolling our eyes, except we have been rolling our eyes that way since the dawn of pop culture.

5) (with a nod to nthdegx) Before dismissing content from another country ask yourself if there is anything about context that you might be missing. Consider asking questions if it interests you, or ignoring it if it doesn’t. For instance, the BBC is the world’s largest news gathering and distribution network. That makes their political editors, Nick Robinson included, more powerful than any American news editors, even those working for Murdoch.

6) ???…more…???

By: Eideteker

Eideteker — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 05:24:19 -0800

I don't like it when the entire front page assumes we give a fuck about politics. Give me more flash games and cool LED tricks.

By: crunchland

crunchland — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 05:44:35 -0800

wilful has posted 13 links and 289 comments to MetaFilter

Don't like the slant of the front page? Well, get crackin' boy.

By: languagehat

languagehat — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 05:46:08 -0800

I don't like flash games and cool LED tricks.

And that was certainly not EB's finest moment.

By: Witty

Witty — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 05:49:32 -0800

Y'all are hilarious... and I wasn't too far off the mark here.

The thing that's worth commenting on is the assumption, by posters, that the audience is essentially exclusively American.

Well, it essentially is. There's nothing to fix here. I've read many British frontpage posts that made similar "assumptions" about their audience too. 'Course I read it assuming that an American posted it. I get about 3/4 of the way through and think, "what the hell is this person talking there iabout?" Then I figure out that the posts is about some crazy event in Liverpool, shrug my shoulders and move on to something else.

If a Chinese girl wants to make a post about some new law in her province, as a way of ranting on about it with other Chinese Mefites, then she is welcomed to make that post. I wouldn't expect her to go bananas in trying to over-explain every aspect of her post just so I would better understand it as an American.

This whole thread is silly.

Tangentially, I wouldn't mind seeing some posts done in other languages.

That's about as stupid an idea as there is.

By: MrZero

MrZero — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 05:56:11 -0800

Personally, if I see a post with the phrases "our government" or "our taxes," I skip it. Try that solution, and I think a lot of your problem will clear up.

I would love to see more international topics discussed. Even the politics posts tend to be better, and actually have some sort of point beyond "my guyz rule ur guys sux."

And Cornell is in Ithaca, New York.

By: languagehat

languagehat — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 05:58:17 -0800

Какой он дурак, етот Witty, а?

By: Witty

Witty — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 06:01:24 -0800

дуньте я

By: SteveInMaine

SteveInMaine — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 06:25:41 -0800

Didn't a prior discussion on this subject lead to Viewropa? I honestly thought that was a good concept, and as a USian enjoyed reading the world perspective.

By: The God Complex

The God Complex — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 06:31:08 -0800

and I wasn't too far off the mark here.

I really wanted to comment on what a stupid remark that was in the thread, but, to my chagrin, the thread had been closed. Thank you for affording me the opportunity to note what stupid non-sequitur that comment was: Witty, that comment was a stupid non-sequitur!

By: Witty

Witty — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 06:35:57 -0800

I really wanted to comment on what a stupid remark that was in the thread, but, to my chagrin, the thread had been closed.

All too conveniently, huh.

Witty, that comment was a stupid non-sequitur!

If you say so.

By: adamvasco

adamvasco — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 06:40:14 -0800

Unfortunately viewropa has fallen off its perch. Maybe it was a little before its time.

By: fleacircus

fleacircus — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 06:50:53 -0800

dash-slot: What irks is that when posters actually make the effort to widen the focus, such as nthdegx, americans make comments which deride the post.

While we're all being so thin-skinned, maybe we could have an end to the European derisions in posts about America? Including say the predictable and sad "'World' series? *snort*" type responses.

anglophiliated: 4) Those jokes about other countries where you refer to, or pun on, the one or two products that you associate with that country – everyone else in the world is rolling their eyes

Meanwhile Americans think "McSeptic USian" humor is ever so clever, and you never see any prejudicial (or just directly insulting) America-bashing from the non-American MeFi members, no sir. If you don't roll your eyes at that too, what does that say?

Peace and love to all (/me runs away, serpentine serpentine!)

By: caddis

caddis — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 06:54:40 -0800

This American MeFite would love to see more posts about the rest of the World.

By: Kirth Gerson

Kirth Gerson — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 07:06:33 -0800

2. Are posters assuming too much esoteric American knowledge?

No, they're probably just "taking the piss," which is "bollocks" and a total "cock-up." I have no idea what that means.

I would like to see more non-U.S. input, and wish that when it does appear, the chosen didn't squat on it. Except for pop culture. Whatever your versions of Tom Cruise and J-Lo, keep them to yourselves, OK?

By: altolinguistic

altolinguistic — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 07:11:04 -0800

I accept that I'm going to have to google some of the more esoteric US politics references if I want to understand some posts, and by the same token, I object to people leaping into a thread which contains something ever-so-slightly foreign (British, say) and saying 'what the hell does that mean?'. Google, people... or do as Witty does and walk on, still ignorant of the matter.

/wishing she could think of an example but knows it happens

By: duck

duck — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 07:16:53 -0800

But as I said, if Matt puts on the posting page, "Please remember that not everyone who reads Metafilter is in the U.S.," what's that likely to do? I certainly see no harm in it, but I also don't know exactly what it would mean. If I make a post about an art collection at Cornell University, for example, does the reminder serve to tell me that now I'm "supposed" to list Cornell's city and state in the post? If someone makes a post about a particular speech a senator gave, will it really encourage a non-USian to read the links if "(D-Ill.)" is included after the Senator's name? Or for that matter, would we have to put "Democrat from Illinois" instead, since we can't assume non-USians would know those abbreviations?

This may be coming off snarkier than I intend. I really don't mean it that way; I'm honestly just trying to determine what -- on a very practical, literal level -- those of you expect this proposed guideline/reminder will accomplish. So, to go back to my "(D-Ill.)" example, do you think all congressmen/women and senators ought to be identified by title, party, and state everytime one of them is mentioned on the front page? And shall we use abbreviations or spell them out? And how will we all come to the same understanding of this unspoken policy, if all Matt is going to do is "remind folks not to assume their audience is solely U.S.-based"?

Maybe I'm reading your tone wrong, but you seem to suggest those options as a ridiculous hardship. So what it would mean "in practical terms" is that if you wouldn't know it about some other country, don't assume other people know it about yours.

So for example, pick a country besides one that you have any particular relationship with. Got your country? Ok...Now, do you know the abbreviations for that country's states/provinces/regions/cantons/whatever? Ok, so you can't assume knowledge of your state abbreviations. Now, do you know the abbreviations for that country's political parties? If you don't, then don't assume people know the abbreviations for your political parties. Do you know the names and locations of random university's in that country? If not, don't assume people know the locations of random universities in your country. B-list celebrities? TV Shows?

Ok, now that you know what you should and shouldn't expect people to know, what to put in the post...So, you're posting about an exhibit of 1920s cereal boxes at Cornell. Do you need to say that Cornell is in Ithaci NY? Well, does knowing it's in Ithica help make sense of the post? For example, is Ithaca well-known for being the Cereal Capital of Rural New York? Has New York State passed bills on the importance of cereal box heritage? If so, you should probably mention the location and these interesting facts. If the exhibit could just as easily be in any random place and it would make no difference, then no need to post the location. Does a senator's party or state add useful context to the post, or is the point really that some senator from somewhere did/said X?

So, the answer in practical terms would be A) Figure out what you can expect other people to know about your country by estimating based on what you know about other countries. B) Of those things you can't expect other people to know, figure out which are useful for understanding the post. C) Include in the post details that in the intersection of A and B.

Not likely to happen, I know. But since you asked what a reminder would ideally accomplish/what exactly Americans are supposed to do, that's my take on the answer.

By: smackfu

smackfu — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 07:18:13 -0800

The only guidelines that work are the ones where if you break them, Matt deletes or edits the post.

By: Witty

Witty — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 07:21:15 -0800

I accept that I'm going to have to google some of the more esoteric US politics references if I want to understand some posts...

And if you don't want to understand some posts? You skip and move on, right (still ignorant of the matter)? You're not suggesting that you, yourself, actually google and research every U.S. political post just so you can better understand them and participate? Looking at your posting history in the blue wouldn't suggest that you do... ever.

By: smackfu

smackfu — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 07:30:36 -0800

This post forgets to mention it's about Canada (although they make it clear that it's not about the US).

This one is apparently about British elections, although it just says "election". This one too.

Here's an obscure cricket post, for the baseball fans.

I think this post is about Australian issues, but you'd have to read the articles to tell. And another. That 2nd one is priceless because the first comment is a complaint that it assumes the audience knows too much about Australian politics.

By: darukaru

darukaru — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 07:47:20 -0800

Hey guys, I heard Americans are dumb. Confirm/deny?

By: Plutor

Plutor — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:01:18 -0800

darukaru: "Hey guys, I heard Americans are dumb. Confirm/deny?"

HURF DURF APPLEPIEEATER

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:05:21 -0800

"Those jokes about other countries where you refer to, or pun on, the one or two products that you associate with that country (maple syrup? bacon?) in reply to some more significant issue – those jokes? – everyone else in the world is rolling their eyes – like ‘all your base are belong to us’ rolling our eyes, except we have been rolling our eyes that way since the dawn of pop culture."

And yet, when a Canadian calls us "Gretsky-nappers" or "flat bacon eaters," I get a little chuckle out of it.

How about this: when reading words like "our," think of that as a collective pronoun reflecting the poster? I'm all for posts about other countries, especially their politics. However, I'm usually bright enough to assume that people are referring to their domestic view, no matter who writes it. A guideline? Jesus! Shall nanny change your nappy for you?

(Side note to nthdegx: While I liked your post, even as an American, I didn't find the commenters dismissing it to be particularly parochial in their dismissal. Unless there were deleted comments...)

By: mediareport

mediareport — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:07:46 -0800

scody, Marquis and blag have it exactly right. I'm not talking about choice of content here, but about the way posters *frame* their content, and I think it's worth mentioning on the posting page that using things like "our President" is discouraged, as MeFi values whatever international flavor it has. It's a blurry line, sure, and certainly wouldn't need to include "Cornell's city and state" when you post about Cornell, but there's no harm in a gentle reminder for folks to be a bit more inclusive in the way they frame their (understandably U.S.-centric) content.

Some of us think it would have at least some effect, and is worth doing for that.

By: blue_beetle

blue_beetle — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:10:58 -0800

Moi, pour un, aimerais souhaiter la bienvenue à nos maîtres americains!

vive la filteration!

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:12:31 -0800

I realize that it will be taken as a symptom of my Americanism, but I can't imagine why someone would be offended by a mention of "our President." If some Bolivian refered to Morales as "our President," it wouldn't bother me.
It really does sound like you're just whining about not being pandered to. And the posting page has enough crap as it is. Do we need another sentence of less than immediate value, and one that is likely to be ignored?

Perhaps we should get around to placing a USA tag on everything that regards the country or what occurs inside its borders?

By: Witty

Witty — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:19:12 -0800

Some of us think it would have at least some effect, and is worth doing for that.

And then, after it's proven that this little effort here has had ZERO effect on how future FPP's are *framed*, you can still pat yourself on the back every time you read the silly *framing* suggestion on the posting page and think, "I'm such a good person, look what I did. I wasted all this time and thought and really, in the end, helped no one".

See, the key is, nobody is asking for anyone's help with this supposed "problem". You're just inventing it.... assuming that it MUST be a problem for someone.

By: Marquis

Marquis — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:22:13 -0800

there's no harm in a gentle reminder for folks to be a bit more inclusive in the way they frame their (understandably U.S.-centric) content

Yes!

I can't imagine why someone would be offended by a mention of "our President."

"I find it not offensive, but just a little, I dunno, unthinking. Inconsiderate? Even that feels too strong a word. But it does kind of irritate. It's most frustrating not because I feel America's shoving around the rest of the world or anything; just that it excludes me from the conversation and makes me feel like I'm interloping on a site that isn't just based in the US, but is an American website in the sense that I can only be a tourist."

By: crunchland

crunchland — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:26:32 -0800

(It should be noted, if you slog through that 500k Miguel thread, that he eventually recanted his position, and ultimately apologized for making the false accusation.)

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:26:41 -0800

And you would feel more welcome if it were a detailed discussion of American politics, just labelled as such? That seems odd to me. Further, as I said, I certainly don't feel any shyness about a) involving myself in threads that refrence "our Prime Minister," and b) asking questions when I don't understand. I've had cricket, Canadian ridings, and Chilean debt explained to me on those terms. Again, the solution doesn't seem to lie in some silly little sentence on the posting page, but rather more high quality material from the rest of the world.

By: mediareport

mediareport — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:27:08 -0800

you can still pat yourself on the back every time

Up yours, Witty. We were having a civil conversation here.

By: funambulist

funambulist — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:29:09 -0800

I would like to see more non-U.S. input, and wish that when it does appear, the chosen didn't squat on it. Except for pop culture. Whatever your versions of Tom Cruise and J-Lo, keep them to yourselves, OK?

Ah, so, it's ok for the Great Satan to corrupt the world with scandalous scantily clad celebs engaging in all sorts of filthy behaviour on our screens, but, when we offer you heathens modestly dressed popstars and Respect-able politicians bringing us the greatest pop culture event evar, you just don't want to see it? Well now you have. And you cannot unsee it.

I hereby declare a fatwa against your imperialist propaganda disguised as parochialism. And I demand an apology. Or else.

By: Gator

Gator — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:33:22 -0800

Is "fatwa [against]" to be the new "moratorium [on]," then? Cool!

By: It's Raining Florence Henderson

It's Raining Florence Henderson — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:34:07 -0800

If you all would kindly stop making posts that I don't care about, MetaFilter would be perfect again. Thank you.

By: peacay

peacay — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:42:33 -0800

It's unfortunate this thread framed 2 separate issues.

smackfu brought up good 'counter'-examples. The whole point (to me) here wasn't so much about Americans excluding the rest of us, the ongoing problem is that some people write their FPPs without giving due thought to their readership.

It doesn't matter if it's American state politics, gamefilter, some tech guru or a fucking insect called spork. Just try to aim for inclusive (ie. not too esoteric, based on vaguely general knowledge level in the readership) and clear language.

Putting 'Bush' in the FPP is of course fine (wellll, you know what I mean) but the name of the Deputy in the Kremlin or L-cysteine or a tv show in Scotland or whatever --- they should be at least very basically qualified. It's just on the front page. We want to know if we want to go read the articles or even if we want to google further. I don't expect witty to bother of course. But anyone else who wanders through this thread - forget the nationality shite; just write clearly in the FPPs and have some consideration for the readership when choosing words, mmkay?

By: blag

blag — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:48:09 -0800

Marquis: The thing that's worth commenting on is the assumption, by posters, that the audience is essentially exclusively American.

Witty: Well, it essentially is.

Devils Slide: United States of America 73%

By: Witty

Witty — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:50:11 -0800

We were having a civil conversation here.

Yea? Cool... So am I. And my opinion on the topic is, there is no problem... only one that you seem to be inventing (which happens quite a bit around here). Your "solution" is silly and will do nothing but serve as way to remind yourself of the worthless personal satisfaction you earned that day back in February '06 for what you think is a positive contribution to the site.

I don't expect Witty to bother of course.

Not if the topic doesn't interest me, no.

By: unreason

unreason — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:54:52 -0800

Witty, you're not a very nice person.

By: mischief

mischief — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:55:53 -0800

molehill

By: Marquis

Marquis — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 08:58:16 -0800

And you would feel more welcome if it were a detailed discussion of American politics, just labelled as such? That seems odd to me.

No, I don't need things spelled out for me. Your comment indicates that you don't understand what mediareport and I are saying. There's two issues in discussion here, and one of them (lots of posts about american issues) doesn't bug me at all. (This is why the "Post more international stuff!" line feels so irreleavant. The problem is not the material being postd.)

The trouble is the relatively rampant assumption that I, as a MetaFilter reader, am an american. The trouble is the use of words like "our leader". It's no big deal, certainly! But it's enough of a deal that I'm glad it's being brought up. Every time I see it, like I said, I feel a bit like a tourist interloping on a website meant for American audiences.

By: It's Raining Florence Henderson

It's Raining Florence Henderson — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 09:00:36 -0800

What does that have to do with me?

By: If I Had An Anus

If I Had An Anus — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 09:10:24 -0800

Molehill, sure, but nobody's making a mountain out of it. Put me down as 100% behind: there's no harm in a gentle reminder for folks.

By: scody

scody — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 09:13:38 -0800

duck: So, the answer in practical terms would be A) Figure out what you can expect other people to know about your country by estimating based on what you know about other countries. B) Of those things you can't expect other people to know, figure out which are useful for understanding the post. C) Include in the post details that in the intersection of A and B.

Not likely to happen, I know. But since you asked what a reminder would ideally accomplish/what exactly Americans are supposed to do, that's my take on the answer.

Duck, I happen to think that I do craft my posts that way -- I'm a writer and an editor, so thinking very carefully about context/audience/etc. are my goddamn bread and butter, not to mention second nature. I appreciate posts crafted exactly the way you say, and plenty of people already post that way -- American Mefites, Canadian Mefites, Italian Mefites, Aussie Mefites. Why? Because they are thoughtful, engaged members who craft posts carefully and intelligently. A guideline/reminder/admonishment is not going to transform half-assed members into good ones. More importantly, it's not going to make the dynamic of Mefi return to the pre-$5-membership days of yore, when the Americentric bias was seemingly less pronounced.

Of course I think it would be great if everyone posted with this sort of clarity, awareness, and sensitivity about the national/social/cultural context of their posts. I also think it would be great if everyone on the site could spell and punctuate worth a damn. Neither is likely to happen -- guideline or not -- because these are essentially qualitative issues, not quantitative ones. Guidelines about searching the archives, not posting self-links to the front page, etc., are easy to follow (even though they get ignored by a certain percentage of people anyway) and go to the basic binary of "can I post this, yes/no?" Contextual guidelines about the way in which posts are crafted just strike me as likely to clutter up the posting page with more reminders -- which, it seems to me, makes it more likely that they'll all be given less attention.

Short answer: I agree that it would be ideal if every member made posts the way you describe. I believe a reminder on the posting page will have precious little effect in reaching this goal.

By: Witty

Witty — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 09:13:44 -0800

Every time I see it, like I said, I feel a bit like a tourist interloping on a website meant for American audiences.

I don't buy it (reads well for this thread though). You knew what this site was all about when you first came for a visit, while you lurked, etc. You've been a member for over 5 years now (happy belated anniversary). You're certainly used to it by now. The site is what it is... and can't possibly cater to everyone's little "issues".

I don't disagree that many of the FPP efforts could stand to be a bit more formalized, with better attention to detail, spelling, capitalization and so forth. But when you have a website hosted in the United States with a membership made up primarily of Americans, there's going to be a thread or two crafted by Americans FOR Americans. You're more than welcome to jump in and play along.

By: blue_beetle

blue_beetle — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 09:17:10 -0800

I apologize for the following comment:

I think we need a final solution.

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 09:20:24 -0800

Marquis has it just about right. I would, of course, add the third issue - that so many of the navel gazers also have to poop on the doorstep of the non-US centric posts. Almost nobody is saying a design limitation or written guideline is needed to alter the US/World balance of posts. All that is requested - requested, mind - is that efforts to deepen and widen the focus are not pooped on.

Equally, if it is unnecessary to make explicit that a post about 'our' election is the Bush v. Kerry psat, why must P_G's post about the UK election be made explicit in it's jurisdiction?

By: jack_mo

jack_mo — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 09:22:03 -0800

Perhaps we should get around to placing a USA tag on everything that regards the country or what occurs inside its borders?

Crazy idea, that, tagging posts according to their subject.

By: Wilder

Wilder — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 09:42:22 -0800

As an EUian the fact that it is mainly North America is one of the main reasons I joined. I've got the BBC for the rest.
So I don't get some of the references, if I'm interested enough in the topic I ask or e-mail. People I have contacted are invariable helpful.

Having said all of that, YOU HAD MIGUEL CARDOSO AS A MEMBER AND YOU LOST HIM??? :p

Guys, that's plain criminal

By: crunchland

crunchland — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 09:45:07 -0800

Yeah, apparently we didn't fellate him adaquately enough.

By: weston

weston — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 10:22:27 -0800

Devils Slide: United States of America 73%

Actually, I think it's 75%. Figuratively.

By: chococat

chococat — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 10:31:17 -0800

While we're all being so thin-skinned, maybe we could have an end to the European derisions in posts about America? Including say the predictable and sad "'World' series? *snort*" type responses.

But that's exactly it! It's kind of telling that that's a "derision" for you, that you're offended by that.
Non-US people get the impression that Americans think they ARE the world and everyone must share the American perspective.
I personally don't care one way or the other about the "our" in American posts. Being Canadian, the feeling that your being force-fed a lot of American stuff is one you just sort of get used to.
It's the assumption that's the most annoying thing. I worked for years in a store in downtown Toronto and at least once a day Americans would ask me "how much is that in American dollars?" as they fumbled with our funny, colourful money...umm...you're in a DIFFERENT COUNTRY.

There was a comment made in one Canadian-themed post that kind of crystallized things for me a while ago:
"Well, I don't know if you realize this but what happens up there affects us zero."
Stereotypes suck but it gets harder and harder to not project the American one on a lot of post(er)s. And I try not to be the Canadian one who thinks he's superior, because I don't.

4) Those jokes about other countries where you refer to, or pun on, the one or two products that you associate with that country (maple syrup? bacon?) in reply to some more significant issue – those jokes? – everyone else in the world is rolling their eyes – like ‘all your base are belong to us’ rolling our eyes, except we have been rolling our eyes that way since the dawn of pop culture.

That's exactly how I feel...and funny that I knew exactly which country you were referring to. The tired jokes that say Canadians are ineffective or polite or say "eh" a lot are just sad. It's like watching a nerdy white comedian trying to be funny by rapping badly....everyone else in the room just kind of feels embarrassed for him, excluding the other nerdy white guys I guess.

Meanwhile Americans think "McSeptic USian" humor is ever so clever, and you never see any prejudicial (or just directly insulting) America-bashing from the non-American MeFi members, no sir.

Of course you do. But it's really not the same. I don't cry too many tears about the U.S.A. getting a raw deal. If we're talking stereotypes then that's kind of like the rich sorority girl feeling persecuted.

I don't think we need more guidelines, or whatever, but a little more awareness on all sides would be great, and it would be great if people were a little more inclusive and enlightened.

On preview, spellcheck appropriately flagged my non-US spelling of "colourful."

By: goodnewsfortheinsane

goodnewsfortheinsane — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 10:34:34 -0800

mediareport writes "While 'policy' is too strong a word, there should probably be a guideline on the posting page that reminds folks not to assume their audience is solely U.S.-based."

Absolutely. I want to underscore this point. I would also like to hear Matt's two cents on this.

dash_slot- writes "What irks is that when posters actually make the effort to widen the focus, such as nthdegx, americans make comments which deride the post. "

anglophiliated writes "4) Those jokes about other countries where you refer to, or pun on, the one or two products that you associate with that country (maple syrup? bacon?) in reply to some more significant issue – those jokes? – everyone else in the world is rolling their eyes – like ‘all your base are belong to us’ rolling our eyes, except we have been rolling our eyes that way since the dawn of pop culture."

Oh, that hits where it hurts. Take this recent example. Here is a thread on a Dutch but at the same time universally relevant topic (language policy and immigration) that expectedly turned into a sort-of NL users' circle jerk, but was still worth it for the contributions from amber, rocketpup and others. However, check out the comments by rxrfrx and Smedleyman - you can just *wait* for those.

Witty writes "If a Chinese girl wants to make a post about some new law in her province, as a way of ranting on about it with other Chinese Mefites, then she is welcomed to make that post. I wouldn't expect her to go bananas in trying to over-explain every aspect of her post just so I would better understand it as an American.

"This whole thread is silly. "

No, that argument is silly, Witty. Not only do I think that is an ignorant way to view Metafilter and the world, I would expect such a post to score high on the collective crappiness scale: why not look for universals, analogies, parallels? The world is full of them!

By: goodnewsfortheinsane

goodnewsfortheinsane — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 10:41:31 -0800

Also, I want to emphasize that this is not a plea for political correctness. Oh hell noes. Also, I don't want American posters (look, I used 'American' to signify 'from the US'! Now isn't that politically incorrect.) to dumb things down for us: hell, I know where Ithaca is, what the World Series is, and can tell which football is which from context with a 98% success rate. ;) If that fails, we have Wikipedia and Google in Europe nowadays.

Rather, what I am promoting here is awareness: some people here are noticably interested in other parts of the world (than their own, which needn't specifically be the USA), and not only do I share that tendency, it is these characters that drew me to Metafilter in the first place.

Just keep in mind that the world is a big place. kthxbi.

By: goodnewsfortheinsane

goodnewsfortheinsane — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 10:42:44 -0800

Fix: "this recent example" should link here

By: Witty

Witty — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 10:48:09 -0800

What? It's a perfect example. If a person from a country other than the U.S. wanted to make a political post about their government, I wouldn't expect them to craft their post any differently, in an effort to cater to my needs as an American (someone not from their country), than Americans do in regards to how they craft posts about the U.S. government.

By: russilwvong

russilwvong — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 10:49:12 -0800

scody: I agree that it would be ideal if every member made posts the way you describe. I believe a reminder on the posting page will have precious little effect in reaching this goal.

Just wanted to say that I agree 100% with scody. (If it matters, I'm posting from Canada.)

By: Witty

Witty — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 10:51:20 -0800

And in response to your example...

However, check out the comments by rxrfrx and Smedleyman - you can just *wait* for those.

People make those kinds of comments in EVERY thread, from every country, no matter who makes the post, regardless of topic. Please.

By: russilwvong

russilwvong — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 10:51:39 -0800

Marquis: This is why the "Post more international stuff!" line feels so irrelevant. The problem is not the material being posted.

I disagree that it's irrelevant. Posts from non-American sources remind MeFi readers that the community isn't exclusively American.

By: edgeways

edgeways — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 10:51:50 -0800

Seems like witty went through a lot of work just to provoke people. essentially his contribution to this thread is;

1.) Look at me, I insulted you over here.
2.) All of you are stupid.
3.) It is ok to post whatever you want.. as long as it is in english.
4.) This is what I think phrased in an insulting "way".
5.) You are stupid.

By: arcticwoman

arcticwoman — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 10:55:40 -0800

Our Groundhog?

Seriously though, I think Marquis and chococat have hit it right on.

By: matteo

matteo — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 11:02:09 -0800

I agree 100% with scody.

I do, too, by default. when in a hurry, I don't even read her comments and just write "what scody said". I never disagree anyway.

By: Witty

Witty — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 11:07:42 -0800

5.) You are stupid.

Well, at least you got that much out of it.

3.) It is ok to post whatever you want.. as long as it is in english.

Uh huh... and people are having a problem with posts worded in such a way that non-Americans somehow feel excluded? This whole thread is dedicated to solving this phantom problem, yet you would openly welcome threads posted in various languages? #5 looks to be dead on edgeways.

By: goodnewsfortheinsane

goodnewsfortheinsane — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 11:07:46 -0800

Alright Witty, I'll give you the "don't change your posting style" part. However, it's a trade-off between integrity and legibility, of course. I consider it a good thing to keep your audience in mind when writing.

By: goodnewsfortheinsane

goodnewsfortheinsane — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 11:09:13 -0800

Doesn't the existence of this thread and subsequent comments disprove the notion that this is a "phantom problem"?

By: funambulist

funambulist — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 11:15:59 -0800

Another agree with scody here.

Not to mention if you put a warning like "please keep in mind the US is not the world" and I'm there about to post, and I'm not in the US, I'd be thinking, damn yanks, of course I know the US is not the world, I live in the non-US world, doh. So that warning would be guilty of america-centrism itself! You don't want that kind of meta-loop do you?

Some of the complaints are valid and I don't mean to dismiss them, but they're mostly about individual attitudes, and you can just respond to those individual instances in the threads. The rest is just the natural US-based nature of the site. If any American were to log on a Spanish bestoftheweb weblog plus forum written in Spanish and contribute there, they'd have to accept it has a Spanish bias. Presumably that's (also) why they'd be there, to read comments of Spanish and Spanish-speaking people on matters of Spanish interest, though not exclusively so. Am I wrong?

By: Witty

Witty — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 11:23:19 -0800

I consider it a good thing to keep your audience in mind when writing.

Me too. My point is, most Americans are considering other Americans as their primary audience when they post about American topics. Where's the foul there? I'm sure Skeptic was thinking primarily of other Dutch Mefites when he offered that post you linked to earlier.

Doesn't the existence of this thread and subsequent comments disprove the notion that this is a "phantom problem"?

Not to me. I believe it to be imagined... and I find it fascinating. I agree that better attention should be given to a post before someone click's the button. But I don't believe you can seriosuly ask people (much less, make a suggestion on the posting page) to craft their posts in such a way as to make them more "accessible" and "friendly" for non-American members. The thread is there, just as it is. You either click on it and get involved or you skip it and look for something else of interest.

By: mischief

mischief — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 11:24:25 -0800

"Doesn't the existence of this thread and subsequent comments disprove the notion that this is a "phantom problem"?"

No.

By: It's Raining Florence Henderson

It's Raining Florence Henderson — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 11:46:10 -0800

It's a MetaFilter thing. You wouldn't understand.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 11:52:13 -0800

U! S! A! U! S! A!

By: keswick

keswick — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 12:06:44 -0800

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 12:24:16 -0800

That accurately represents the American experience. Now you foriegners are no longer tourists! Just clip and save!

By: blag

blag — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 12:32:47 -0800

sweet. new wallpaper

By: dame

dame — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 12:36:29 -0800

I'm grinning a bit, because I just complained to a pal yesterday about the use of "America" and "American" to designate the US and its residents. I live north of the US/Canada border, and I live in America. My friend just got back from San Miguel De Allende, which is also in America.

Now that this thread is mostly over, I'm gonna take a minute to discuss how much this inane line of reasoning annoys me. If you live in Canada, you live in North America. If you are in Mexico, you are also in North America. There is already a perfectly good name for it. There is not however a perfectly good replacement for American (and don't give me any of that appalling USian crap). Don't people have anything better to do than manufacture petty discontent because for this brief historical moment, America is the world gorilla. Geez.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 12:39:13 -0800

Dame: No, because they are all bored in Canada or unemployed in Mexico. USA USA USA!

By: raygun21

raygun21 — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 12:39:49 -0800

how about a reminder to use 'my' instead of 'our'?

the intended post-subject is indicated as belonging only to the poster, until such a time that the reader of the post can (through comments) indicate that they too accept that subject as belonging to a collective (as opposed to an individual).

also, this would allow the reader to indicate (via clicking-through to the post) that they have an interest in the subject and are aware that any location/cultural/societal-based biases may be inherent to the thread.

By: mischief

mischief — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 12:58:38 -0800

We have the freedom to speak however we want in this country cuz our forefathers died to make it so.

Well, someone's forefathers anyway, my ancestors all immigrated here in the early 1900s.

By: Mitheral

Mitheral — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 13:30:32 -0800

Witty writes "I've read many British frontpage posts that made similar 'assumptions' about their audience too. "Course I read it assuming that an American posted it. I get about 3/4 of the way through and think, 'what the hell is this person talking there iabout?' Then I figure out that the posts is about some crazy event in Liverpool, shrug my shoulders and move on to something else."

This post was intentionally phrased to protest the default Americianism here. Some in the thread got it and others, not so much.

By: matkline

matkline — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 13:38:15 -0800

We can't help being #1.

By: Penks

Penks — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 13:43:10 -0800

dame : "If you live in Canada, you live in North America. If you are in Mexico, you are also in North America."

Well, some countries (such as Mexico) teach that there are five continents: America, Europe, Asia, Africa and Oceania. So to some, America is a continent, from Canada to Argentina.

There was an AskMe thread about a year ago about this, but I'm too lazy to search for it.

By: Penks

Penks — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 13:50:34 -0800

Found it. Here it is.

By: dame

dame — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 13:57:34 -0800

Man, you mean Mexicans are even making up geography just to have something to complain about. Must be nice to be Mexican.

By: dame

dame — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 14:02:17 -0800

Okay, having gotten that out of my system, the crux of my complaint still remains. There is no confusion as to what an "American" is besides that manufactured for some inane geopolitical point.

By: mischief

mischief — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 14:16:03 -0800

Long live Lee Greenwood.

By: funambulist

funambulist — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 14:21:42 -0800

I'm confused now. So Canadians don't want US citizens to be called Americans? Does that mean Canadians want to be called Americans too? And what are the Mexicans complaining about?

By: mullacc

mullacc — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 14:56:00 -0800

I'm confused now. So Americans don't want US citizens to be called Americans? Does that mean Americans want to be called Americans too? And what are the Americans complaining about?

Does that clear it up?

By: the aloha

the aloha — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 14:59:38 -0800

hey, if you don't like it you can just get out. i've already joined the enemy, what about you?

By: languagehat

languagehat — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 15:00:31 -0800

I'm gonna take a minute to discuss how much this inane line of reasoning annoys me

I stand with dame on this issue. American is the adjective corresponding to United States of America. If you don't like it, too bad, but you're not going to change usage, so if you bitch about it you're just doing it to hear the sound of your own voice.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 15:02:00 -0800

I'm a Canadian. It bugs me to no end that the terms "America" and "American" are used to indicate both the USA, and the continent of North America. No way in hell do I want myself and my country splashed by the shit that is always part of US American international politics and trade, news, entertainment media, and so on.

So, sure, Canadians don't want to be called Americans. Call us Canadians when you're talking about us, call it Canada when talking about our country, call it North America when talking about the continent, and ... if it's not too much hassle ... call it the USA instead of America.

kthxbye.

By: sgt.serenity

sgt.serenity — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 15:02:06 -0800

(It should be noted, if you slog through that 500k Miguel thread, that he eventually recanted his position, and ultimately apologized for making the false accusation.)
posted by crunchland at 4:26 PM GMT on February 2 [!]

It wasnt a false accusation and guess what ?
Migs is no longer here.

By: timeistight

timeistight — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 15:04:48 -0800

More's the pity.

By: wilful

wilful — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 15:16:20 -0800

Thank you folks, particularly Marquis, for stating my case better than I was going to. As some have said, it's not necessarily the content of the front page that concerns me, it's the framing.

Of course we can all just skip over the threads we don't like or understand, but isn't that a bit of a loss, isn't that just saying that the posts are lower quality and designed not to engage a proportion of users? Thought we could do better than that.

I still think a sentence in the guidelines could remind members that there is an international audience here. But I'd like to see what member #1 thinks.

By: reflecked

reflecked — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 15:22:43 -0800

Dame, I do love you, kiddo. :D

Yo soy un americano!

By: crunchland

crunchland — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 15:23:27 -0800

keep suckin' sarge.

By: raygun21

raygun21 — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 15:34:09 -0800

Of course we can all just skip over the threads we don't like or understand, but isn't that a bit of a loss, isn't that just saying that the posts are lower quality and designed not to engage a proportion of users? Thought we could do better than that.

It's only better if you assume that each post is actually deserving to be read. Sorry, but just because it's posted don't mean it's a special-snowflake®.

You're also assuming that the posts are constructed to exclude readers on purpose, as opposed to it just being the poster's 'style.' Just because a poster has socio/political/cultural biases doesn't mean that they are aware of them and perpetuating them JUST TO PERTURB YOU.

Do you know how many (possible) quality posts/links have been skipped just because someone used that lame one.link.per.letter.in.the.word.posts? It's a casualty of this type of group environment that...oh my god...you have to deal with people that don't act/think/speak/write/poop/breathe the same as you do.

What the hell ever will we do?

now that i've thought about it a bit, i'm kind of pissed that iron chef is so asia-centric. can't they speak english? don't they know that it's the international language of air traffic? how the hell am i supposed to enjoy that content if i can't understand it? yeah they do dub it, but that takes so much work to understand the words when i'm looking at their mouth...it's not fair.

By: The Monkey

The Monkey — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 15:36:30 -0800

I'd post more about New Zealand, but our elected representatives were elected, and represent us, and are mostly pretty smart, even the ones whose politics I don't agree with. Also, haven't been attacked by terrorists since that thing with the fucking French in the eighties.

So it'd be, you know, boring... by comparison.

Suck it, Seppos.

Actually, the reason I don't post at all is I know I'd post skin crawlingly nationalistic and partisan puff jobs about how cool my country is.

Hint: way cooler than your country.

By: timeistight

timeistight — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 15:36:50 -0800

I'm a Canadian. It bugs me to no end that the terms "America" and "American" are used to indicate both the USA, and the continent of North America.

I've never heard anyone use "America" or "American" to mean "North America" or "North American" outside of one of these "how come?" discussions. Everyone here in the great white north uses those terms to refer to the USA.

By: russilwvong

russilwvong — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:02:30 -0800

So it'd be, you know, boring... by comparison.

Didn't New Zealand have to take some drastic steps to get its budget back into balance in the mid-1980s? How's that been working out? We heard quite a bit about that in Canada; there was a TV show called W5 which ran a program on that subject. Probably contributed quite a bit to raising public awareness of the deficit problem. I think that'd make a good FPP.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:14:06 -0800

I've never heard anyone use "America" or "American" to mean "North America" or "North American" outside of one of these "how come?" discussions.

Likewise, I've never heard these phrases before:

And yet, when a Canadian calls us "Gretsky-nappers" or "flat bacon eaters," I get a little chuckle out of it.

Ah well.

There are an increasing number of people these days (even in Canada, imagine that!) -- at least one of whom is vocal in this thread -- who seem to take the stance that consideration and kindness and politeness as a foundation for ordinary behaviour are foolish and weak, and that there is no reason to be that way unless one is coerced.

(I note that I'm as apt as anyone to fly off the handle if provoked. That's not what I'm talking about, though, even if a little potkettling is deserved.)

I don't care much for those people, but you've got to route around them as damage. That's life.

By: justgary

justgary — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:15:35 -0800

It wasnt a false accusation and guess what ?
Migs is no longer here.
posted by sgt.serenity

And yet, remarkably, metafilter marches on.

By: sgt.serenity

sgt.serenity — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:16:43 -0800

you sure take a long time to come , crunch.

By: Eideteker

Eideteker — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:18:56 -0800

SteveInMaine wrote "Didn't a prior discussion on this subject lead to Viewropa? I honestly thought that was a good concept, and as a USian enjoyed reading the world perspective." [emphasis mine]

The world being Europe. (and USian is probably the stupidest thing since "Xian" for "Christian." I prefer to be called a Seppo (septic tank, rhymes with "yank").)

MrZero wrote "And Cornell is in Ithaca, New York."

w00t, so is Eideteker! (that handsome devil)

edgeways wrote "Seems like witty went through a lot of work just to provoke people. essentially his contribution to this thread is;

"1.) Look at me, I insulted you over here.
"2.) All of you are stupid.
"3.) It is ok to post whatever you want.. as long as it is in english.
"4.) This is what I think phrased in an insulting 'way'.
"5.) You are stupid."

No opinions? No problem!

By: timeistight

timeistight — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:22:59 -0800

It wasnt a false accusation and guess what ?
Migs is no longer here.
posted by sgt.serenity

And yet, remarkably, metafilter marches on.
posted by justgary at 4:15 PM PST on February 2 [!]

Limps, more like.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:42:48 -0800

"Likewise, I've never heard these phrases before..."

I live in the only state from which one can travel due south and end up in Canada, and I live less than half an hour from the border, so I tend to have Canadian friends. They make fun of us for liking processed cheese, drinking Coors and having the "shitty side of Niagra." We make fun of them for Alan Thicke, Regina and Quebec.
The only time it really matters is during the winter olympics, and even then not so much.

By: scody

scody — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:49:02 -0800

They make fun of us for liking processed cheese, drinking Coors and having the "shitty side of Niagra."

Well, I grew up in Colorado, and we make fun of people for drinking Coors too. Does this mean I'm an honorary Canadian? Excellent.

By: sfenders

sfenders — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:53:25 -0800

There is no confusion as to what an "American" is,

... at least not here at metafilter. Or in America. I mean the real America. There's not much (maybe a little) confusion on the name in England, France, Canada, Germany, or China either, from my limited knowledge of those places. Most likely you'll find most of the confusion in South America. It's one of their major exports.

Personally I couldn't care less if Americans want to refer to their country as "America" and their president as "The President", expecting us to know what they mean even in the absence of any clarifying context. That's just fine. It's a cute little habit of theirs.

However, I do think the policy on posts that only Americans are likely to care about should be: "Don't do that. (Unless you really want to.)" Because any subject that is going to be interesting to people only because its source happens to be somehow mixed up with their concept of patriotism isn't one that's likely to be worth thinking or reading about, not only for the rest of the world, but also for Americans with half a clue. Sometimes American politics can be interesting, and when it is, I don't see why the whole world shouldn't be happy to read about it on metafilter.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:54:52 -0800

I live in the only state from which one can travel due south and end up in Canada

Errr... (man I hate pop quizzes) Michigan? (*checks profile*) Yay, I guessed it!

Could be an East-West thing. Also could be that I haven't lived in Canada for so many years, so I'm not hip to the latest goodnatured slurs. 'Cheeseheads' was one of the ones with currency back in the day, for Canucks.

By: justgary

justgary — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 17:41:43 -0800

Limps, more like.
posted by timeistight

Well, you're here. Must not be that bad.

He added something to mefi. That thread was not a good example.

By: Ritchie

Ritchie — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 17:54:58 -0800

So, no chance of getting you guys to adopt the metric system, then?

By: dame

dame — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 20:27:55 -0800

Don't even start me on the metric system.

By: dame

dame — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 20:44:59 -0800

Also, reflecked, I still love you too. Even if you're wrong.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 21:59:28 -0800

Scody: I don't know anyone who likes Coors. I don't think their stereotypes have to be accurate to be funny.

By: timeistight

timeistight — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 22:15:58 -0800

I live in the only state from which one can travel due south and end up in Canada

Errr... (man I hate pop quizzes) Michigan? (*checks profile*) Yay, I guessed it!

That doesn't work in Alaska?

By: gsb

gsb — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 22:53:58 -0800

So, as an example to help the poster, the link from this front page post can only be viewed if you're in the U.S. (or perhaps NorthAmerica). Can't blame the poster I guess, but there is a method to circumvent this problem, by inserting:

http://www.google.com/translate?langpair=en|en&u=

in front of the link. Example. Has this been discussed before? Is it worth a note on the posting page?

By: Alvy Ampersand

Alvy Ampersand — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 23:19:56 -0800

I still don't get this; content reflects the nationalities of its members, the majority of whom are American. So what?
While there shouldn't be confusion when titles("Our President", "The PM") are used*, to find it exclusionary or presumptuous is just looking for an excuse to be offended.
If someone feels their nation is underrepresented on the Blue, rectify man, rectify!

*It should be clear from the content of the post which country is being discussed; if it doesn't, it's a poorly constructed FPP, not an imperialistic snub.

My dad drinks Coors. Surest way of making sure I don't steal any, I suppose.

By: taz

taz — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 23:58:28 -0800

I'm from the U.S., but I haven't lived there for a long time, so I notice a lot of stuff - it's night for you, but morning for me; it's winter for you, but summer for someone down under...

I always notice phrases like "our president", "our country", etc., and there's always lots of pop culture stuff that I need to google. (I'm still not quite clear on who Star Jones is, and never did figure out where that "talk to the hand" thing came from. For the longest time I was blissfully unaware of what a Paris Hilton was, aside from a hotel in France.)

It's not offensive to me that people forget that they are also talking to people who aren't in the U.S., but I am impressed with posters who take a more global view, wherever they're from. I see them as more sophisticated and probably better informed.

By: taz

taz — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 00:04:41 -0800

also, btw, the assumption that every poster is male unless the nick is really obviously feminine is another one of these things... I don't find it insulting, I'm just a lot more impressed with those who don't do it.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 00:09:52 -0800

That doesn't work in Alaska?

Christ, I should've caught that. I used to go to Hyder to buy Everclear, for chrissakes!

By: sgt.serenity

sgt.serenity — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 00:44:19 -0800

my jaws getting sore.

By: dg

dg — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 01:13:03 -0800

Tangentially, I wouldn't mind seeing some posts done in other languages.
Yeah, some in English instead of ~~American~~ USian would be nice. Especially if they are about Godzone. Way cooler than your country, no matter what your country is.
damned French bastards

By: funambulist

funambulist — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 01:27:46 -0800

mullacc: Does that clear it up?

Er, no! but thanks for trying :)

I have never heard anyone use "Americans" to refer to the whole continent(s). Mexicans are Mexicans. Canadians are Canadians. Argentinians are Argentinians, etc. etc. US citizens are well, US citizens, or Americans. There isn't an adjective directly derived from "USA" in English, as there is in some other languages (estadounidense, statunitense). 'USians' is funny but its made up.

So yeah ok I guess 'Americans' is not specific and correct enough as "US citzens" but when you have lots of US citizens, and everyone of them when abroad, talking about themselves as Americans, US politicians referring to the US as America, what do you do? I just go with the flow. If someone from the US is using Americans I'll respond using Americans too. It's not up to me to choose how they want to be addressed. See, see how supine I am to US imperialism. Sad isn't it...

five fresh fish: So, sure, Canadians don't want to be called Americans.

Phew, I'm glad at least I got that much.

Anyway, from now on, I'll be using estadounidense even when writing in English, until all you native English speakers come up with a sensible equivalent. So there. It's not my bloody problem is it.

By: Bugbread

Bugbread — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 02:18:06 -0800

I live in the only state from which one can travel due south and end up in Canada

Errr... (man I hate pop quizzes) Michigan? (*checks profile*) Yay, I guessed it!

That doesn't work in Alaska?

From what I can see on Google Maps, no, for the most part, going south in Alaska results in falling into the Gulf of Alaska. I can only see a few really tiny pointy bits that would allow one to go south into Canada.

By: The Monkey

The Monkey — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 02:35:26 -0800

I think that'd make a good FPP.

I'm sure you're right, but instead of dry economics, I went with the much easier to tackle famous-New-Zealander-filmmaker turns cross-dressing-Hollywood-prostitute.

(Ahh, that old story, eh? If you've heard it once, you've heard it a thousand times.)

By: reflecked

reflecked — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 02:44:14 -0800

I think that USians latched onto designating their country as THE America for the purpose of poetry and song lyrics. "USians" doesn't have many pleasing rhymes.

The metric system rocks.

You can live at Point Roberts and go south to get to Canada (BC).

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 04:28:34 -0800

I also used to drink at Gene Kiniski's bar in Point Roberts, and I should also know that.

There's a theme developing here...

By: Witty

Witty — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 05:31:31 -0800

I still think a sentence in the guidelines could remind members that there is an international audience here.

Brilliant! And can someone go over to wilful's house and baby-proof the place for him/her?

By: wilful

wilful — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 05:34:31 -0800

How did you get that name, witty? Self-bestowed, I can only guess. Twat.

By: goodnewsfortheinsane

goodnewsfortheinsane — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 07:01:52 -0800

How's that sarcasm thing working out for you, Witty?

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 07:07:34 -0800

"That doesn't work in Alaska?"

Nope. You end up in the Pacific. It only works in Michigan because of the weird Windsor peninsula.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 07:19:55 -0800

Wrong, pointless as it is.

Bottom of the panhandle.

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 07:26:56 -0800

If someone feels their nation is underrepresented on the Blue, rectify man, rectify!
Alvy, for the last time, it ain't just about the origin of the content. I like US content: I don't like the parochialism of the American empire.*
It's about the responses of some US members to non-US content, as you will see from nthdegx's comments, my comments, and the comments of others (not responded to by many, and misrepresented by others).

That is all.

*Hey, I've found the title of my next book!

By: dame

dame — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 07:32:26 -0800

When you move to metric time, we can talk about how something not being base ten is confusing.

Also, isn't refusing to call someone an American after they expressed preference the same as calling someone black "colored"? After all, they aren't *really* black. And it means something different in England.

By: dame

dame — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 07:34:24 -0800

On lack of preview: dash, we were parochial before we were an empire and I'm sure parochial we shall remain. Besides, Brits going on about parochial empires, well . . .

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 07:41:56 -0800

Brits going on about parochial empires, well . . .

Eh? Is that a serious comment? If so, could you expand it?

I'll take it as a joke, and see if you do have a more on-topic response. Heh heh heh.

By: funambulist

funambulist — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 07:58:00 -0800

Also, isn't refusing to call someone an American after they expressed preference the same as calling someone black "colored"?

Is it? Really? I don't know.

But for the record, fwiw, I sure never meant anything *that* heavy with my "If someone from the US is using Americans I'll respond using Americans too". I was also being kind of facetious. And I assumed no one was really being too serious about that either. Perhaps I was wrong. Sorry.

Estadounidenses? Todos locos! Locos!

By: dame

dame — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 08:11:24 -0800

I wasn't entirely serious, funambulist. And dash, please observe my tongue. I have stuck it out for you.

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 08:16:14 -0800

Fair enough. I guess we've all gotten as far as we can with this.

< pokes tongue out at dame>

By: Alvy Ampersand

Alvy Ampersand — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 09:33:47 -0800

dash_slot-: So the problem is assholes motivated by nationalist chauvinism, instead of the usual desire to look wicked cool or Witty - urm, I mean witty; I know I don't have to tell you that's nothing new, and not going away any time soon.
But I did anyway.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 10:50:28 -0800

Hup! You're right, Stavros, and I'm wrong. My high school teachers here in Michigan have been proven liars!

By: Plutor

Plutor — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 11:45:11 -0800

klangklangston: "Hup! You're right, Stavros, and I'm wrong. My high school teachers here in Michigan have been proven liars!"

Also, Maine, New Hampshire, New York, and Minnesota all have (very small) portions that are directly north of (very small) parts of Canada.

By: Plutor

Plutor — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 11:53:13 -0800

(I'm sorry, kk.)

By: duck

duck — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 11:54:46 -0800

Also, Maine, New Hampshire, New York, and Minnesota all have (very small) portions that are directly north of (very small) parts of Canada.

Also Vermont, based on that New Hampshire map.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:01:16 -0800

DAMN YOU PUBLIC EDUCATION!

By: duck

duck — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:05:35 -0800

DAMN YOU PUBLIC EDUCATION!

I think it's your trusting ways that are at fault. I know that whenever I come across something that I learned in high school, I'm always a little surprised to find out that it's true.

Now why would you be just running around assuming that stuff they told you in school was true?

By: Bugbread

Bugbread — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 19:59:20 -0800

Also Vermont, based on that New Hampshire map.

How do you figure? The top of Vermont appears to be just about as flat as flat can be.

By: duck

duck — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 20:45:27 -0800

Me: Also Vermont, based on that New Hampshire map.

Bugbread:How do you figure? The top of Vermont appears to be just about as flat as flat can be

To the east of the straight part is the bumpy part.

Load the map linked from "New Hampshire" above. Don't change the view of the zoom or anything. Now see Pittsburgh? Look straight up from pittsburgh? See that bit of the US shaped like a hand with the index finger (not the other finger) pointing out in an "A-ha!" sort of gesture? Well if you go into that finger, and go due south, you'd be in Canada.

I don't know what the scale of this map is, but we're probably talking about a piece of the US the size of a storage shed, but there it is.

By: Eideteker

Eideteker — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 21:41:43 -0800

You're looking at New Hampshire. And this is by now far off-topic.

Everyone is invited to visit me, and Cornell University, in Ithaca, NY!

so lonely

By: duck

duck — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 21:59:15 -0800

Hmm...according to Google Earth, you're right. But google maps shows the state border to the west of the squigly finger part....Hmmm...on further checking, I see...I'm looking at the NH Maine boder. The VT/NH border is hidden under that little yellow line. My bad. Carry on VT, you are entirely south of Canada.

By: reflecked

reflecked — Sat, 04 Feb 2006 06:37:38 -0800

I'm in favour of "Internet Time", dame. That's as metric as it could get and still work. It's really useful to be totally coordinated time-wise with people all over the globe.

Why, you're right, Eideteker! Cornell Uni (famous for its plant scientists) IS in Ithaca! Google told me so. I'm sorry you're lonely. Do you talk to your plants?

By: Eideteker

Eideteker — Sat, 04 Feb 2006 09:45:47 -0800

Plants! That's a brilliant idea! Why didn't I think of that? I will get a whole bunch and name one after each MeFite. Then I can have arguments with them all day long, every day, even after the cable company disconnects my Internet for nonpayment!

By: reflecked

reflecked — Sat, 04 Feb 2006 11:13:33 -0800

If I could be so bold... I'd like to be a Night-Blooming Cereus. If that role's taken, I'd be nicely represented by catnip.

By: raedyn

raedyn — Wed, 08 Feb 2006 07:20:38 -0800

What irks is that when posters actually make the effort to widen the focus, such as nthdegx, americans make comments which deride the post. [...] Some of the american members are completely uninterested in events outside the empire. - dash_slot

There's no reason they have to care. I don't care about every damn American political post. But why do some of them bother to foray into a foreign topic to say how much they don't care, or to divert the topic onto their own American topics? That's the disrespectfulness that bothers me.

It's about the responses of some US members to non-US content, - dash_slot

Yeah. Example: Here we have a good discussion going on a decision of the Canadian Supreme Court. One American comes in and tries to be a relevant part of the conversation and is willing to listen and learn a bit about the specific-to-Canada stuff that he doesn't understand. Fine. But then a different Ameican poster comes in spewing quotes from SOCTUS decisions. We were talking about the Canadian Supreme Court, and he starts quoting their American counterparts as if they're precedent setting in Canada. To me, that's totally out of line. And I said so, in-thread.

In another, the post is "reasons to be cheerful" and it's about studies showing things that increase people's happiness. And the first comment is "Reasons to be Miserable: Alito to be confirmed today". As if this is something thatt affects most people. Newsflash: to the billions of people who are not American, it doesn't affect us in the least.

That all said, I agree with scody and other that suggest an extra line of text on the posting page won't make a lick of difference. It's a courtesy thing that some Mefites are lacking.

We make fun of them [our Canadian friends] for Alan Thicke, Regina and Quebec. - klangklangston

What's wrong with Regina? It's the city that rhymes with fun!