Bad posts are....

October 16, 2001 7:11 AM

Bad posts are good for the soul. The over-confident are cut down to size; the timid are reassured they're right to think twice before posting; collective standards are reasserted. Honesty prevails; confessions abound and everyone realizes they're human - at least for a while.
posted by MiguelCardoso to MetaFilter-related at 7:11 AM (47 comments total)

*sigh*
posted by rodii at 7:21 AM on October 16, 2001

See? Feeling better already!
posted by MiguelCardoso at 7:25 AM on October 16, 2001

I'm sorry, Miguel, I'm lost.

Is this an example of a bad post? It certainly seems to be, but if you need your soul repaired, please find yourself a certified counsellor, it will likely do you a whole lot more good then espousing and demonstrating BREAKING THE RULES here.
posted by cCranium at 7:38 AM on October 16, 2001

Deep Thoughts
posted by Perigee at 7:51 AM on October 16, 2001

Miguel, your comment is completely content-free. Now maybe if you'd linked to some post or other to illustrate your point, that would be something. As it is, you're just wasting space.

And now I've made it worse. Crap.
posted by donnagirl at 7:52 AM on October 16, 2001

No,cCranium, it's quite genuine. I'm talking about integration. The system of denouncing double posts and bad posts actually works. When people get together to define what is and what isn't useful or desirable it makes them think about what brought them together in the first place.

I've seen a lot of members go through this process and they always reemerge stronger and more attuned. Taking criticism is an important part of fitting in. I posted this because the system works, not because it doesn't. I'm all for self-policing but there's also the far more interesting question of self-identifying as a community.

Rules are usually in a state of flux and are constructed by the group who tries to keep them. Bad posts - which happen to anyone - are a way of testing these rules. Worth debating, in my opinion.

P.S.

My last comment was for rodii. It's he who's feeling better, not me. I don't really understand why it's worth posting "*sigh* but, who knows, perhaps there's something in it.




posted by MiguelCardoso at 7:58 AM on October 16, 2001

It's not the bad posts you should be celebrating, it's the policing.
posted by D at 8:09 AM on October 16, 2001

Bad posts - which happen to anyone - are a way of testing these rules. Worth debating, in my opinion.

Are you advocating having members intentionally put up bad posts so that we can all think about it? There are already more than enough lousy front=page posts and meaningless comments out there to choke a pig.

Are you saying that moderating is a bad thing, and that mandatory screening of posts and comments will be detrimental to the community? Are you saying that it is a mistake to erase worthless, flame-ridden threads from the site? If that is what you are advocating, then why don't you just say that instead of telling us "bad posts are good for the soul"?


WHAT ARE YOU SAYING?!?!?


(post preview: I agree with D.)
posted by Avogadro at 8:13 AM on October 16, 2001

I've seen a lot of members go through this process and they always reemerge stronger and more attuned.

Alright, I admit my point was probably strongly obfuscated, so I'll make it a little bit clearer.

Miguel, your posting style, as you know, irritates a number of people here for whatever reason.

You say that people discussing posting styles attunes those being discussed to what the other members expect, and from what I understand you say this makes posters post stuff that more clearly expresses their point, it makes them stronger.

But, and here's the issue, you don't seem to be changing your style to any great degree; you're still overly-fawning for many MeFi users.

You therefore invalidate your own point while trying to make it.
posted by cCranium at 8:14 AM on October 16, 2001

this thread reads like mefibation to me.
it seems as though the mighty miguelcar is sputtering.
posted by moz at 8:18 AM on October 16, 2001

: Discuss.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:31 AM on October 16, 2001

cCranium, this is an international community. In my culture praising someone means you have no problems with yourself. Dissing is considered petty . when you don't like something you simply ignore it. Why "sink down to their level", as we say? I realize now how irksome this is - but this, precisely I've learnt with MetaFilter, because people like you take the trouble to point it out.
The proof of this is that I've stopped praising members publicly - I email them, as I emailed you - so I am trying very hard to change my style. Can't change the content, though. We all are as we are and honesty is the best policy.

You therefore invalidate your own point while trying to make it
Why? My point is precisely that this sort of give-and-take should be welcomed. I do fawn over Metafilter, it's true. But the main reason why is because of it's honesty. There's nothing else quite like it. Surely we should learn from that.

Plus it would be very sad if, while debating how better to understand Muslims, Afghans and other cultures, you weren't able to understand a culture - Latin European culture - which is so close to you.

Dissing people in Portugal, Spain and Italy is considered wimpish and cowardly, specially if they are obviously wrong about something. Thanking people is considered polite. Is that so difficult to understand? Why are you all so averse to praise anyway?

Perhaps you have too sharp a divide between private and public honesty. But that's good, because MetaFilter works as it is. But you must understand that other cultures find it hypocritical to say something in private - i.e. by email - and another in public. We can live with it; it makes it more interesting. Who would want a monocordic, unicultural community? What would anyone of us learn?

Avogadro: No, I think people should do their best to put up good posts. But it's good for them when others point out that they're not. It defines the community.

I've gone on too long, everyone. I'll not be posting for a few days to be able to understand better what's going on. I am trying though...!





posted by MiguelCardoso at 8:41 AM on October 16, 2001

Even I have to pipe in with a *sigh*. I can't believe I'm saying it but here's an analogy. (My apologies to those from non-baseball places.) Y'know how sometimes, when a batter is thinking too much about the mechanics of his swing, it makes his swing that much worse? That's what we're doing here. I think we should continue to enforce the basic rules, but let's just play ball.

This applies to myself at least as much as to anyone else. I know I'm as uptight as anyone here. My brain is full.
posted by jpoulos at 8:44 AM on October 16, 2001

*sees the sign from the catcher, shakes him off*

*sees the new sign, "fastball, inside"*

*winds up, and the throw*

*accidentally beans jpoulos on the backside*

SORRY!
posted by Avogadro at 8:47 AM on October 16, 2001

Miguel, ask yourself: "Why did I post this? Did I think anyone really needed to hear it? Did I think anyone wanted to hear it? Did I post just because I feel compelled to post, a lot?"

Ask yourself this, every time. Preferably before you post.
posted by rodii at 8:57 AM on October 16, 2001

Perhaps you have too sharp a divide between private and public honesty. But that's good, because MetaFilter works as it is. But you must understand that other cultures find it hypocritical to say something in private - i.e. by email - and another in public. We can live with it; it makes it more interesting. Who would want a monocordic, unicultural community? What would anyone of us learn?

Have I ever spoken to you via email? Have I ever been anything but honest with you? Have I ever once contradicted myself to you? I'd like to know if I have.

I certainly don't dislike you, Miguel. To pull from our recent shared history, I wouldn't have given as elaborate an explanation as I did about the double posting problems if I didn't think you were worth the time.

It's reasonably easy to cross the line into the realm of excess, and while compliments are nice and usually appreciated, it's easy to take that to far.

I agree that the crux of the matter is cultural differences, but while you try to educate people about Latin European culture, let me let you in on a cultural assumption most of the countries who were at one point colonised by England share.

Generally speaking when people are obsequious, they're overcompensating for their disdain and superiority. I'm not accusing you of disdain and feelings of superiority, but your words and your style come across as very obsequious. This creates a rift that is very hard to cross, because it is very hard to tell if you're being condescending, which is not an attitude that's taken well.

I really hate to sound xenophobic, but if you don't adapt your writing style to the site then you're going to consistantly viewed as being obsequious and condescending.

It's your call as to how you want to present yourself, I'm just trying to offer some suggestions.
posted by cCranium at 9:02 AM on October 16, 2001

Miguel, I think you are a very interesting guy, but I have to go with rodii here. You get my official "AAAAugh!!!" for this thread. To me, this seems like a thread just to stimulate conversation, ANY conversation.

And yeah, your tone has gotten a little too fawning for me too. MetaFilter's great and all, but jeez! I feel like there's a brass band playing behind every one of your comments lately.

Watch out there, Avogadro. Only takes little chin music to clear the benches! (or, in this case, ass music. [good band name])
posted by Kafkaesque at 9:05 AM on October 16, 2001

miguel, i think it is perhaps less a cultural difference between the various nationalities or ethnicities of the posters here, and more about the community practices. for example, let's look at the posting statistics for a few people in this thread.

MiguelCardoso has posted 16 links and 400 comments to MetaFilter and 13 threads and 131 comments to MetaTalk
member since: September 3, 2001

rodii has posted 21 links and 1345 comments to MetaFilter and 15 threads and 460 comments to MetaTalk
member since: June 22, 2000

cCranium has posted 12 links and 1509 comments to MetaFilter and 19 threads and 443 comments to MetaTalk
member since: April 20, 2000

donnagirl has posted no links 14 comments to MetaFilter and no threads and 5 comments to MetaTalk
member since: July 3, 2001

Avogadro has posted 9 links and 369 comments to MetaFilter and 6 threads and 115 comments to MetaTalk
member since: August 17, 2000

judith has posted 4 links and 109 comments to MetaFilter and 3 threads and 39 comments to MetaTalk
member since: February 28, 2000

in summary: you are posting significantly more than other people who have joined the community as recently as you have. you are posting significantly more than many people who joined the community much earlier than you did. in a community as crowded as metafilter can be, your volume of comments draws attention, and as you're experiencing, much of that attention isn't positive.

the conversations you're starting in metatalk only seem to be adding to that noise. many of us, myself included, have wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt. i will say that you are reaching the point where the volume of posts threatens the leeway i - and many others - are inclined to offer you. i would urge you to attempt to be considerate of those around you, the way that you would in a real life gathering, not dominating the conversation with many, many, many more comments than those around you are offering.
posted by judith at 9:13 AM on October 16, 2001

Sounds like Miguel's decrease in MeFiOutput has been primarily due to increased private email conversations.

(Ponders possibility of hidden agenda...discards as too Machiavellian)

It's late and I'm tired, but I'm kind of feeling the MeTa grey at the moment. Perhaps we should all just jump back into the main (#336699) game, and talk passionately about stuff (provided we *ahem* get some decent links to talk about).

Miguel - just get the hell outta MeTa for a while. Forget the talking about the talking, just do some talking.

If you know what I mean.

(edit after preview refresh : shucks, judith, what are moz, Perigee, D and I, chopped liver? Always the bride's maid, never the bride. *sob*)
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:20 AM on October 16, 2001

shucks, judith, what are moz, Perigee, D and I, chopped liver? Always the bride's maid, never the bride.

i got lazy, stav. feel free to fill in the blanks.
posted by judith at 9:24 AM on October 16, 2001

S'okay. Just way past my bedtime, and I'm cranky, is all...
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:28 AM on October 16, 2001

Apparently it has not been a good day for American-Portuguese relationship:

LISBON (Reuters) - U.S. soldiers attacked a Portuguese soldier who gave a mock salute to a television picture of Osama bin Laden at the Lajes NATO base in the Azores islands, state radio said Monday.
...

"Several G.I.s jumped on the Portuguese soldier and beat him violently until other Portuguese soldiers appeared and a real pitched battle ensued," RDP said.

"American and Portuguese police were called and 30 were needed to end the fight, and even then they only restored order by drawing their weapons," the report added. ... [source | via Fark]

Or Nordic-American for that matter. [also via Fark].


posted by tamim at 9:38 AM on October 16, 2001

I think I'm more like Kibbles and Bits; but thanks for the PR, stavros.

Perigee joined January 29, 2001: 9.5 Months
MiguelCardoso joined September 3, 2001: 1.5 Months

Perigee has posted 11 links and 155 comments to MetaFilter
MiguelCardoso has posted 16 links and 400 comments to MetaFilter

Perigee has posted 6 threads and 43 comments to MetaTalk.
MiguelCardoso has posted 13 threads and 131 comments to MetaTalk

Perhaps 'obsequious' is not a word I personally would use in terms of a disturbing presence, Miguel... But, for someone who's been here for a single month and change, you're more ubiquitous than Micheal Jackson in his heyday. You may find that you will be listened to more if you post less often.




posted by Perigee at 9:56 AM on October 16, 2001

wow, i like the whole burger king theme you had going on there, perigee.
posted by moz at 10:36 AM on October 16, 2001

Tamim is the new Lawrence Lee.
posted by sylloge at 12:13 PM on October 16, 2001

Come on people, lighten up. Volume is what matters in a discussion. You're all just jealous that Miguel is doing 25% of all posting. It's time to admit that high volume posting is the way to go. Let go of the idea that quality is more important than seeing your name more than anyone else's.

Now, embrace this new Metafilter paradigm and start commenting like you have no other purpose in life. Go!
posted by y6y6y6 at 12:44 PM on October 16, 2001

Avagadro: I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and just take my base, thank you, without rubbing the bruise, but staring you down the whole way up the line. But you know in 3 innings I'll be right back crowding that plate. I own that plate. And I'll be watching you.

And, as Kafkaesque pointed out, my boys on the bench will be watching you too. :-)
posted by jpoulos at 12:48 PM on October 16, 2001

Being fairly new, I know my comments are worthless, but I think you guys are being harsh. There is certainly enough room for Miguel's numerous comments.

It gives me a good read when I need it.

posted by thekorruptor at 1:19 PM on October 16, 2001

sylloge: "Tamim is the new Lawrence Lee.

That is absolutely the best thing anyone has said to me all day. Thanks :-). If only I were as good as Lawrence Lee. I only try.
posted by tamim at 1:19 PM on October 16, 2001

This is a chatterbox intervention, right? So now's the time for the good cop to point out that Miguel's worthy comments are (IMO) very well thought out and positioned, and that holds a very high value in my book these days since there are several highly visible posters who never ever rise above inflammatory rhetoric.
To (hopefully accurately) gently sum up the issue: more precision and insight; less filler and total airtime.


And less mention of 'your culture', as if the Portuguese had never made it off of those beautiful beaches to expose other world inhabitants to the habits of its natives. It's a bit sociologically disdainful.
posted by dness2 at 1:33 PM on October 16, 2001

Generally speaking when people are obsequious, they're overcompensating for their disdain and superiority.

Boy, my view has generally been the exact opposite. I have typically seen the overly obsequious as having not enough self-esteem. Sort of the small outsider who's desperate to fit in with what are perceived as the cool kids.

Of course my social radar is pretty crummy, and you guys in your ineffable wisdom are clearly so much smarter than I am, and... Holy crap! You're right it does mask arrogance and disdain.
posted by willnot at 2:27 PM on October 16, 2001

Ha ha! Good one, willnot.
posted by rodii at 3:29 PM on October 16, 2001

in summary: you are posting significantly more than other people who have joined the community as recently as you have. you are posting significantly more than many people who joined the community much earlier than you did.

And your point is? I think we are all aware of the volume of MiguelCardoso's posting. But unless it is a question of quantity VERSUS quality, I don't see the relevance. Some people simply have more to say than others. Some people simply are willing to take the time and make the effort to participate more than others. Some people limit their posting to once every month or two, and we'd all probably be better served if they contained the impulse on THOSE occasions. Some are content merely to lurk and never post. It seems to me we should limit ourselves to judging the quality of what people post, not the quantity or the frequency (I already lost on that one).

I enjoy (most of) MiguelCardoso's meta-Metafilter posts. There is more to see and learn and understand here than puppets posing in posters or where the latest anthrax envelope rumor is brewing. This is a new and fascinating mode of human interaction, information dissemination, and opinion development, and as such, I think it is as worthy a subject for consideration and discussion as any other.

It doesn't explicitly belong in the MeFi proper section--and MiguelCardoso was slapped down when he tested the waters there and directed here. Now you're giving him shit for waxing meta in Meta?!? Should there be another category created in Meta for TRULY meta consideration and analysis, beyond the pragmatic and prosaic likes of "feature requests," that those offended by depth and a multiplicity of angles could easily and resolutely avoid? Personally, I think some people are far too narrow and insular, and far, far too quick to try to impose their perspectives upon others....
posted by rushmc at 5:20 PM on October 16, 2001

"Bad posts are good for the soul. The over-confident are cut down to size; the timid are reassured they're right to think twice before posting; collective standards are reasserted. Honesty prevails; confessions abound and everyone realizes they're human" this sounds like a postcard from the the maslow school of inverted love.
posted by clavdivs at 5:50 PM on October 16, 2001

Personally, I think some people are far too narrow and insular, and far, far too quick to try to impose their perspectives upon others....

Yeah, they pine for the pure unbesmirched days of one post, one comment past when--in their own minds--they were smarter than everybody else...

Although the masters make the rules
for the wise men and the fools
I've got nothing ma, to live up to
posted by y2karl at 6:29 PM on October 16, 2001

If you don't want to play, you don't play. But there's room for play. And there's a time when the bell rings.
posted by holgate at 6:32 PM on October 16, 2001

clavdivs! where were you in the spellcheck thread? we missed you!

here's something: some people (usually a girl) like to talk about relationships. other people (usually a guy) prefer just to *have* the relationship.

miguel keeps coming in here and saying "let's talk about our relationship". I understand that. but it's driving some of you nuts. I understand that, too.

I propose that those of you who prefer simply *living* metatalk and metafilter simply not participate in threads that are really just talk about our relationship with one another.

if miguel starts posting enough that it drives matt batty, matt can write him a note about it.
posted by rebeccablood at 7:46 PM on October 16, 2001

if miguel starts posting enough that it drives matt batty, matt can write him a note about it.

rumor has it that this point has come & gone.
posted by judith at 8:05 PM on October 16, 2001

I like you MiguelCardoso. I enjoy your comments, I enjoy your point of view and I enjoy the freshness that you bring to the comment table.
I do want to know when you sleep...

That said, apparently your output in MeFi/MeTa is enormous. Maybe you should tone it down? I think that is one way of solving whatever problem there is.

Another solution would be for those who don't approve of Miguel's output to...

not read him!

That may be a bit drastic, I know, since reading is what MeFi is all about. Reading the thoughts and opinions of others, liking them, not liking them (the thoughts and opinions), gaining insight into other people. If you find that you've had enough of a person or a thread, go somewhere else.

Of course, that's just me. I come from the live and let live school of thought.
posted by ashbury at 8:50 PM on October 16, 2001

rumor has it that this point has come & gone.

I didn't realize matt was having trouble accessing the board today.

it's matt's board, if he has a problem with a user, he has lots of tools at his disposal to deal with the situation. until he chooses to use those tools, users who dislike reading another user's posts can just skip over them.
posted by rebeccablood at 10:57 PM on October 16, 2001

users who dislike reading another user's posts can just skip over them.

you mean, without comment??????
blasphemy!!!!!!!!
how will i impress readers with my MeFiMaturity, my towering intellect, my ability to pick the most miniscule nits in others contributions? how will i drive off annoying newbies, foster affectionate repartee amongst the other MeFiCops and inform the world at large that i and i alone have mastered the intricacies of the Perfect MeFi Post????? how then, am i to validate my sorry existence without the ability to shame others? rebeccablood, you have obviously missed the entire point of MeFiRegularity!
posted by quonsar at 9:39 AM on October 17, 2001

*spews*
posted by rodii at 10:56 AM on October 17, 2001

Now see what you've done?
posted by iceberg273 at 11:33 AM on October 17, 2001

quonsar spots another MeFi tagline: picking the most miniscule nits
posted by rushmc at 5:18 PM on October 17, 2001

Sounds to me that most of you want miguel to change before he can join the MeFi friendship tree. My opinion: that it never hurts to keep a few wise old owls around.
posted by redhead at 8:02 AM on October 18, 2001

Whoa. Whoa. Redhead, you just damaged my brain.
posted by rodii at 8:23 AM on October 18, 2001

rodii
lol, quick call for help. There is absolutely no charge for the phone call.
posted by redhead at 12:41 PM on October 18, 2001