"An attack on Iran is on" February 12, 2006 10:49 AM Subscribe
Actually, so far, it's not. Not yet, anyway, although I readily concede it's probably coming.
I have no problem with a FPP recounting developments to date about a likely future event, but it's disingenuous to the point of trolling to use a phrase that says the event is actually taking place.
I have no problem with a FPP recounting developments to date about a likely future event, but it's disingenuous to the point of trolling to use a phrase that says the event is actually taking place.
jesus christ, who cares?
posted by thirteenkiller at 11:07 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by thirteenkiller at 11:07 AM on February 12, 2006
Well, frankly, in a brief moment of self-doubt I wondered about that -- does the phrase "it's on" just mean something subtly different from what I think it means? Naaaaah, I concluded.
"It's on" suggests pretty strongly to me that something has actually begun. Not that something is continuing to be thought about, planned for, imagined, considered -- it's commenced, it's frickin' happening now. Obviously, the links imply otherwise, but I had to read them to satisfy myself that it isn't on yet.
From what I read, I'm not the only person who had this experience.
thirteenkiller, why are you even posting here?
posted by alumshubby at 11:08 AM on February 12, 2006
"It's on" suggests pretty strongly to me that something has actually begun. Not that something is continuing to be thought about, planned for, imagined, considered -- it's commenced, it's frickin' happening now. Obviously, the links imply otherwise, but I had to read them to satisfy myself that it isn't on yet.
From what I read, I'm not the only person who had this experience.
thirteenkiller, why are you even posting here?
posted by alumshubby at 11:08 AM on February 12, 2006
NewsFilter: Subtle grammatical error confuses smart people. Outrage ensues!
posted by public at 11:11 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by public at 11:11 AM on February 12, 2006
"Democrats win presidency! Strategists at the DNC are drawing up plans to win the 2008 Presidential election."
posted by smackfu at 11:14 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by smackfu at 11:14 AM on February 12, 2006
It is obvious from the rest of the post that "It's on" does not refer to actual attacks, but rather to a build-up of hostilities possibly leading to a war.
Oh and stop fucking whining already, you fucking whiner.
posted by insomnus at 11:18 AM on February 12, 2006
Oh and stop fucking whining already, you fucking whiner.
posted by insomnus at 11:18 AM on February 12, 2006
alumshubby, I want you to know that I think this post is utterly ridiculous. How can you be serious about this? Unbelievable.
posted by thirteenkiller at 11:18 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by thirteenkiller at 11:18 AM on February 12, 2006
You seem to be just as serious in rebuttal for something you think is trivial.
posted by smackfu at 11:19 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by smackfu at 11:19 AM on February 12, 2006
(Although as soon as alumshubby questioned you, this thing was destined for massive trainwreck. Prove me wrong people!)
posted by smackfu at 11:22 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by smackfu at 11:22 AM on February 12, 2006
Why not to post this as a comment in the thread instead? It doesn't seem like there is much to discuss about it in MetaTalk.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:23 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:23 AM on February 12, 2006
I wasn't particularly outraged (except for an asshat who had a problem with me flagging it as noise. But I've been given to understand he's due for some comeuppance in any case.)
OK, I guess whether it's just sloppiness with language or blatant trolling, it's fine either way. Go back to your lives, citizens; nothing to see here.
mathowie, since you don't know what's going on in your own web site, you might want to talk to jessamyn once in a while...maybe then you'd know what you're talking about.
(On preview: I forgot -- when you post to MeTa, the cockroaches all come scurrying out.)
posted by alumshubby at 11:25 AM on February 12, 2006
OK, I guess whether it's just sloppiness with language or blatant trolling, it's fine either way. Go back to your lives, citizens; nothing to see here.
mathowie, since you don't know what's going on in your own web site, you might want to talk to jessamyn once in a while...maybe then you'd know what you're talking about.
(On preview: I forgot -- when you post to MeTa, the cockroaches all come scurrying out.)
posted by alumshubby at 11:25 AM on February 12, 2006
This seems like a vanity post. You could have said the same thing in thread (hopefully without the accusation of trolling), which is very on topic and arguable according to the facts but you wouldn't have had as many responses or exposure to your unique and beautiful snowflake. Definitely not worth a Meta post.
posted by Roger Dodger at 11:28 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by Roger Dodger at 11:28 AM on February 12, 2006
OK, I guess whether it's just sloppiness with language or blatant trolling, it's fine either way. Go back to your lives, citizens; nothing to see here.
It is obvious from the rest of the post that "It's on" does not refer to actual attacks, but rather to a build-up of hostilities possibly leading to a war.
posted by insomnus at 11:30 AM on February 12, 2006
It is obvious from the rest of the post that "It's on" does not refer to actual attacks, but rather to a build-up of hostilities possibly leading to a war.
posted by insomnus at 11:30 AM on February 12, 2006
Oh and stop fucking whining already, you fucking whiner.
posted by insomnus at 11:30 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by insomnus at 11:30 AM on February 12, 2006
"Oh and stop fucking whining already, you fucking whiner." -- The Cabal
posted by public at 11:33 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by public at 11:33 AM on February 12, 2006
a phrase that says the event is actually taking place
It's on means something more like "the game is afoot."
Exactly what not-presently-taking-place event do you think was disingenuously reported? It says that research and planning is taking place, and the links would suggest that that much is true. Are you worried that someone will actually believe a nuclear strike against Iran has taken place? I really don't understand.
posted by scarabic at 11:33 AM on February 12, 2006
It's on means something more like "the game is afoot."
Exactly what not-presently-taking-place event do you think was disingenuously reported? It says that research and planning is taking place, and the links would suggest that that much is true. Are you worried that someone will actually believe a nuclear strike against Iran has taken place? I really don't understand.
posted by scarabic at 11:33 AM on February 12, 2006
RD, I did and was directed to come here. Sorry if one of the site administrators disagrees with you about what's worth a MeTa post, but then, you seemed to think it was worth replying to rather than ignoring, so I guess it's vanity all round.
posted by alumshubby at 11:34 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by alumshubby at 11:34 AM on February 12, 2006
Funny thing about opinions. Everybody has one.
posted by Roger Dodger at 11:39 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by Roger Dodger at 11:39 AM on February 12, 2006
Why not to post this as a comment in the thread instead? It doesn't seem like there is much to discuss about it in MetaTalk.So, you're ok now with criticizing FPPs within their threads? Cool!!!
posted by mathowie at 11:23 AM PST on February 12 [!]
posted by mischief at 11:40 AM on February 12, 2006
Yes, and yours was overcome by events, evidently.
posted by alumshubby at 11:40 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by alumshubby at 11:40 AM on February 12, 2006
Oh, and, insomnus...go pollute some other thread if you have nothing constructive to add here. My opinions of you are even worse.
posted by alumshubby at 11:43 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by alumshubby at 11:43 AM on February 12, 2006
Hey fella, settle down, we're all friends here.
posted by thirteenkiller at 11:45 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by thirteenkiller at 11:45 AM on February 12, 2006
The thing is, alum, you flagged the post, and then you let everyone in the thread know you flagged the post. And then you came here to let everyone know you have a problem with the post. The whole point of the flagging system is to make your opinion known to the admins without adding to the noise level in general. Now, it's Sunday afternoon, and maybe we all don't have much to do, and this is as good a way as any to pass the time, but what exactly do you wish to accomplish? Do you want the post deleted? Do you want Jesse Helms to be more careful in the future? Do you want some kind of policy change? Or do you just want to make your opinion as visible as possible? Seriously, I'd like to know.
posted by Roger Dodger at 11:47 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by Roger Dodger at 11:47 AM on February 12, 2006
I will say this one more time, without profanities, in the interest of better understanding between men.
It is obvious from the rest of the post that "It's on" does not refer to actual attacks, but rather to a build-up of hostilities possibly leading to a war.
If you understood and saw this sentence earlier, please elaborate why you do not find it constructive.
"Oh and stop fucking whining already, you fucking whiner." -- The Cabal
There is no cabal. Seriously. The cabal does not exist. This is not obfuscation meant to hide the existence of a massive cabal bent on trolling metafilter, there really is no cabal.
posted by insomnus at 11:52 AM on February 12, 2006
It is obvious from the rest of the post that "It's on" does not refer to actual attacks, but rather to a build-up of hostilities possibly leading to a war.
If you understood and saw this sentence earlier, please elaborate why you do not find it constructive.
"Oh and stop fucking whining already, you fucking whiner." -- The Cabal
There is no cabal. Seriously. The cabal does not exist. This is not obfuscation meant to hide the existence of a massive cabal bent on trolling metafilter, there really is no cabal.
posted by insomnus at 11:52 AM on February 12, 2006
"there really is no cabal." : The Ancients have spoken.
posted by mischief at 11:54 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by mischief at 11:54 AM on February 12, 2006
Pointless callout. The way I read it, "It's on!" is nothing more than the response to a challenge to "bring it on." Like this, see?
posted by emelenjr at 12:03 PM on February 12, 2006
posted by emelenjr at 12:03 PM on February 12, 2006
Metafilter: Oh and stop fucking whining already, you fucking whiner.
posted by clevershark at 12:08 PM on February 12, 2006
posted by clevershark at 12:08 PM on February 12, 2006
...I've been given to understand he's due for some comeuppance...
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 12:10 PM on February 12, 2006
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 12:10 PM on February 12, 2006
Rodger Dodger:
Gee a constructive comment...the surprise is hard to recover from!
One of the admins suggested that I post to MeTa about the post. I'm unclear as to what good the flagging system is if I flag and then am told I should consider posting to MeTa. Worse, another admin subsequently told me I should complain in the thread -- so, what good is either flagging or MeTa?
What do I want? Basically, I'd prefer that people don't post misleading FPPs. "It's on" misled at least four people. It's about a sufficiently significant (not to say dangerous) geopolitical development that I'd prefer people didn't imply warshots were being fired if that's not, in fact, the case.
Apologies if I've screwed up anyone's Sunday, but then, thinking that some people from Whiteman AFB might've been in harm's way -- and then finding out they weren't -- jerked me around and started to screw up mine. If you've participated in this thread, I hope your temporary discomfiture was less than mine.
(On preview: insomnus, I've already pointed out that it's not obvious to more people than myself. First, you were rude, and now you're being obtuse.)
posted by alumshubby at 12:14 PM on February 12, 2006
Gee a constructive comment...the surprise is hard to recover from!
One of the admins suggested that I post to MeTa about the post. I'm unclear as to what good the flagging system is if I flag and then am told I should consider posting to MeTa. Worse, another admin subsequently told me I should complain in the thread -- so, what good is either flagging or MeTa?
What do I want? Basically, I'd prefer that people don't post misleading FPPs. "It's on" misled at least four people. It's about a sufficiently significant (not to say dangerous) geopolitical development that I'd prefer people didn't imply warshots were being fired if that's not, in fact, the case.
Apologies if I've screwed up anyone's Sunday, but then, thinking that some people from Whiteman AFB might've been in harm's way -- and then finding out they weren't -- jerked me around and started to screw up mine. If you've participated in this thread, I hope your temporary discomfiture was less than mine.
(On preview: insomnus, I've already pointed out that it's not obvious to more people than myself. First, you were rude, and now you're being obtuse.)
posted by alumshubby at 12:14 PM on February 12, 2006
wow. alums, you may want to reconsider your position on this one. It seem patently obvious that this post wasn't even nearly intended to imply that the bombing had already begun. Furthermore, finding other people who are comfused by simple colloquialisms doesn't prove that the post needs editing, and especially not that the poster is trolling. Just about anything can be misread by a number of people if enough people are reading it, and mefi's readership is fairly high. Couple that with the way you're replying to people in here, and it seems to me like you desperately need a breather. You're getting awfully upset for almost no reason.
for the record: there is no hard and fast rule about what belongs in MeTa, and what belongs in a thread. That's why #1 has said that he'd like to make talk pages for individual threads, because that way ALL post-qulity related commentary can go in the talk page and there won't be any more gray area. Until then, though, there is a gray area and anyone who's acting like all post related commentary goes to MetaTalk is being disingenuous.
posted by shmegegge at 12:18 PM on February 12, 2006
for the record: there is no hard and fast rule about what belongs in MeTa, and what belongs in a thread. That's why #1 has said that he'd like to make talk pages for individual threads, because that way ALL post-qulity related commentary can go in the talk page and there won't be any more gray area. Until then, though, there is a gray area and anyone who's acting like all post related commentary goes to MetaTalk is being disingenuous.
posted by shmegegge at 12:18 PM on February 12, 2006
Yeah, you're right; I guess being called a "fucking whiner" is no reason to get upset, is it? I had a problem with being (whether intentionally or not) misled and following an admin's advice on responding to it. Excuse me for expression an opinion.
And you're quite right; the admins themselves can't be consistent about what should be flagged. responded to in-thread, or called out in MeTa, so I'm sure you understand my own confusion.
posted by alumshubby at 12:29 PM on February 12, 2006
And you're quite right; the admins themselves can't be consistent about what should be flagged. responded to in-thread, or called out in MeTa, so I'm sure you understand my own confusion.
posted by alumshubby at 12:29 PM on February 12, 2006
Personally, I like the flagging system. I installed the greasemonkey script that makes it a one-page pop up affair and gives a bright green "Successfully Flagged" tag. It gives me satisfaction to see that. Whether my flagging does anything or not really is a mystery because those statistics are unavailable to us, but I really don't care to see them anyway. For me, it's my own little sign of protest, without the drama or conflict seemingly unavoidably involved in a Metatalk callout. Matt said earlier that Meta only receives 10% of the page hits compared to the rest of the site. I like reading it though, just to see the personality conflicts between the prolific posters. I also like the ambiguity of guidelines in Metafilter as a whole. It really does give an organic feel and gives the site itself a personality of its own. Of course, it's probably more like a personality disorder, but it's interesting nonetheless. Anyhow, I hope you got everything you needed to say off of your chest. Try not to let anyone goad you into a spectacular flameout, though I'm sure that would be entertaining as well.
posted by Roger Dodger at 12:33 PM on February 12, 2006
posted by Roger Dodger at 12:33 PM on February 12, 2006
To summarize:
jessamyn saw the flag and said, "Post to MeTa." mathowie saw the MeTa post and said, "Post to MeFi."
alumshubby saw them both and said, "fuck this, it's not working."
Those of you who posted in good faith, thank you for your opinions.
Those of you who posted to insult or act like fourteen-year-olds, fuck you all very much.
posted by alumshubby at 12:41 PM on February 12, 2006
jessamyn saw the flag and said, "Post to MeTa." mathowie saw the MeTa post and said, "Post to MeFi."
alumshubby saw them both and said, "fuck this, it's not working."
Those of you who posted in good faith, thank you for your opinions.
Those of you who posted to insult or act like fourteen-year-olds, fuck you all very much.
posted by alumshubby at 12:41 PM on February 12, 2006
first of all, you adopted your snotty tone of voice before anyone called you a fucking whiner.
second of all, no, it's not a big deal to be called a fucking whiner, and you need to get over it.
third of all, you are a fucking whiner, and you're being a prick on top of it.
This is why I'm offering you the advice of taking a breather. You're getting really bent out of shape over nothing.
posted by shmegegge at 12:42 PM on February 12, 2006
second of all, no, it's not a big deal to be called a fucking whiner, and you need to get over it.
third of all, you are a fucking whiner, and you're being a prick on top of it.
This is why I'm offering you the advice of taking a breather. You're getting really bent out of shape over nothing.
posted by shmegegge at 12:42 PM on February 12, 2006
It is obvious from the rest of the post that "It's on" does not refer to actual attacks, but rather to a build-up of hostilities possibly leading to a war.
Quite. And even if there is room for misunderstanding (due presumably to not reading any of the sentences in the post after 'It's on') actually clicking on the links and reading the articles they point to would clear that misunderstanding in - what? - two seconds. Excess fretting based on realisation of embarrassingly daft reading comprehension error, by the looks of it.
posted by jack_mo at 12:46 PM on February 12, 2006
Quite. And even if there is room for misunderstanding (due presumably to not reading any of the sentences in the post after 'It's on') actually clicking on the links and reading the articles they point to would clear that misunderstanding in - what? - two seconds. Excess fretting based on realisation of embarrassingly daft reading comprehension error, by the looks of it.
posted by jack_mo at 12:46 PM on February 12, 2006
"act like fourteen-year-olds"
I'll take that as a compliment.
posted by mischief at 12:46 PM on February 12, 2006
I'll take that as a compliment.
posted by mischief at 12:46 PM on February 12, 2006
I bear a certain amount of responsibility for this.
threeblindmice and alumshubby were engaging in a "no YOU suck" pissing match in that thread that people had flagged as derails. I removed two comments (one from each) which had nothing to do with the thread and emailed alumshubby to ask him to take his issues with threeblindmice to email or MeTa. threeblindmice has no contact information in his profile, or I would have emailed him the same exact thing.
At some point in this email exchange (five emails and counting!) alumshubby thought I meant to take complaints about the thread here, which I still don't think is a particularly bad thing to do, but wasn't what I meant. I also warned him that people would call him a whiner. I also mentioned that once I saw mathowie online, I'd talk to him about threeblindmice and his assholery in that thread and elsewhere.
In any case, sorry if more clarity on my part might have helped avoid some of this Sunday morning bullshit.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:47 PM on February 12, 2006
threeblindmice and alumshubby were engaging in a "no YOU suck" pissing match in that thread that people had flagged as derails. I removed two comments (one from each) which had nothing to do with the thread and emailed alumshubby to ask him to take his issues with threeblindmice to email or MeTa. threeblindmice has no contact information in his profile, or I would have emailed him the same exact thing.
At some point in this email exchange (five emails and counting!) alumshubby thought I meant to take complaints about the thread here, which I still don't think is a particularly bad thing to do, but wasn't what I meant. I also warned him that people would call him a whiner. I also mentioned that once I saw mathowie online, I'd talk to him about threeblindmice and his assholery in that thread and elsewhere.
In any case, sorry if more clarity on my part might have helped avoid some of this Sunday morning bullshit.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:47 PM on February 12, 2006
Jesus, what an ass.
Metafilter: Fuck you all very much.
posted by Duncan at 12:52 PM on February 12, 2006
Metafilter: Fuck you all very much.
posted by Duncan at 12:52 PM on February 12, 2006
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by 517 at 10:50 AM on February 12, 2006