Additional AskMe questions for a fee

September 30, 2006 3:19 PM

Shouldnt there be a way, where members in good standing can pay an additional $5 and get to ask another question before their 1 week auto-block is up?
This is functionally the same as getting a second sock puppet account and thus having two accounts from which to ask questions -- without all the run-around and deception.
posted by jak68 to Feature Requests at 3:19 PM (81 comments total)

That's a lot of code to simplify the morality of it.
posted by scarabic at 3:46 PM on September 30, 2006

The limit is in place to enforce a minimum floor to the use of a community resource. People shouldn't be getting second accounts just to post questions and we shouldn't be making it easier for anyone. In fact there has been significant discussion of raising the limit to 10 days or two weeks.
posted by Mitheral at 3:51 PM on September 30, 2006

I would not have said it any better than Mitheral said it. If you feel the need to ask more than one question per week on a regular basis, you may using AskMe a bit too much.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 4:06 PM on September 30, 2006

I'd be happier if Matt had a magic crystal ball and banned the sockpuppets.

And "AskMePro" accounts which would allow you to ask a question a day for the low, low price of $100/month. (Questions still eligible for deletion due to stupidity.)

Or a redirect to Yahoo! Answers.
posted by D.C. at 4:09 PM on September 30, 2006

The green is a precious resource. Don't use more than your share.
posted by LarryC at 4:23 PM on September 30, 2006

What they said.
posted by obloquy at 4:25 PM on September 30, 2006

sheesh. sorry i asked.
Silly questions could still be deleted; and if someone were to "ask too many questions" (2 per week is too much?!) they could still come up on the natural limits of the forum. I guess i'm not convinced that brutal soviet-style metering of question-asking priveledges is really the only way to go. Its because the green IS a precious resource, that many of us want to use it more. Raising the access to it, just slightly, isnt all that radical, wont break the system. We'll sock puppet our way there past your party-oversight anyway, wont we?

Just 2 cents. You guys do a great job managing this amazing site, but it is also capable of policing itself perhaps more than you give it credit for...
j
posted by jak68 at 4:54 PM on September 30, 2006

Another example of an alternate approach that would not break the system: instead of 1 per week, why not 4/month? it amounts to the same traffic, but gives much greater flexibility and options. A user might not have the need for 2 questions in a given week. With the latter approach, should she have that need, she could utilize the green for it. Nothing breaks; same overall traffic limits: but more options.
More than one way to skin this cat. Options are good. Soviet styles arent, so much.
posted by jak68 at 4:59 PM on September 30, 2006

members in good standing

What's THAT?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:59 PM on September 30, 2006

members in good standing

someone you dont hate. someone who hasnt pissed off the administrators. someone who isnt banned or in danger of being banned. someone with demonstrated contributions to the quality of life on the site.
posted by jak68 at 5:01 PM on September 30, 2006

"someone you dont hate"

That narrows it down considerably.

HATE
HATE
HATE

/ebk
posted by mr_crash_davis at 5:05 PM on September 30, 2006

So, which is your sock puppet, jak68?
posted by blag at 5:09 PM on September 30, 2006

er, there was a little bit more in that paragraph.
posted by jak68 at 5:10 PM on September 30, 2006

So, which is your sock puppet, jak68?

maaaybe I have one; maaaybe I dont.
Silly, isnt it? A simple change in policy would solve everything for everyone for all time.
posted by jak68 at 5:11 PM on September 30, 2006

quality of life on the site.

Perhaps, maybe, some people are getting too serious about the site?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:13 PM on September 30, 2006

that brutal soviet-style metering of question-asking priveledges

Oh for cryin' out loud, you precious little snowflake you.

Look, when you post a question, it is not a neutral act. You drive someone else's question off the front page. You privilege yourself over them. On some days new questions roll off the front page of AskMe in a few hours. One ought to think long and hard before posting a question at all. And you want two a week? And if you don't get them, Matt is Stalin?
posted by LarryC at 5:14 PM on September 30, 2006

larryC, matt isnt stalin. Would Stalin oppose 4/month instead of 1/week? Whats the difference? If Stalin would oppose that, I'd like some sort of a explanation. Matt isnt Stalin for wanting balance. But if Matt cant explain why 4/month is substantively different from 1/week, and Matt has any authority in the outcome, then Matt might be Stalinesque.
posted by jak68 at 5:17 PM on September 30, 2006

On some days new questions roll off the front page of AskMe in a few hours.

On the one hand, I hear ya, somedays there are a lot of questions and it can seem a bit overwhelming or too much.

But there is is a previous page button AND the RSS feed. It's managable.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:18 PM on September 30, 2006

We already have enough trouble with questions scrolling off the green too fast. As Mitheral said, there's been some recent talk about restricting the priviledge to once every 10 days or so to help reduce this. If you want to circumvent the rules you're free to do so - but you risk incurring a call-out and, worst of all, you're an ass for not abiding by the community rules.

Or, what the prof said.
posted by blag at 5:19 PM on September 30, 2006

But if Matt cant explain why 4/month is substantively different from 1/week, and Matt has any authority in the outcome, then Matt might be Stalinesque.

Hahahahaha. Matt, you bastard, you built this website & made rules that I don't like. Now I know just how Ivan Denisovich felt.
posted by dame at 5:24 PM on September 30, 2006

We already have enough trouble with questions scrolling off the green too fast.

Then use the RSS feed and the previous page button.


As Mitheral said, there's been some recent talk about restricting the priviledge to once every 10 days or so to help reduce this.

When was this?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:27 PM on September 30, 2006

you can keep arguing and belaboring your point jak68 (yes, you have a point! got it--), but it's just noise now. you've had your administrative ruling and now the topic is open to snark. if you choose to persist, please take a lighthearted approach. like Hitler did.
posted by carsonb at 5:31 PM on September 30, 2006

Brandon Blatcher writes 'Then use the RSS feed and the previous page button.'

I'd bet that the majority of answerers don't use either. Should we force them to adapt their browsing habits just to keep up?

Brandon Blatcher writes 'When was this?'

Last month.
posted by blag at 5:39 PM on September 30, 2006

c.f.
posted by obloquy at 5:43 PM on September 30, 2006

I HATE all of......

GODDAMNIT CRASH, QUIT STEALING MY THUNDER!!!!
posted by eyeballkid at 5:46 PM on September 30, 2006

I'd bet that the majority of answerers don't use either. Should we force them to adapt their browsing habits just to keep up?

No one is forcing them to read AskMe. If they want to keep up, they'll keep up. Hell, there's a lot of stuff to read on the internet. Either you learn to filter it or go insane.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:53 PM on September 30, 2006

you've had your administrative ruling
I guess thats my second point: This whole process seems awfully arbitrary. (So was the rhetorical analogy to Soviets really all that inappropriate?)

So I've made two points today. Good day, I guess. Lost on both, but what the hell. I tried.
posted by jak68 at 6:10 PM on September 30, 2006

I had a thought: at the moment, the AskMe feed uses the "category" field to display the question's tags. I'm not sure how useful this feature is, or if anyone uses it?

If the feed was changed so that the category field actually displayed the question's category, it would be pretty simple to create a FeedRinse rule which displayed, say, everything except the 'relationship' category. Or just the 'computers' and 'technology' categories.

It might help people keep up with the questions they're interested in, and allow them to skip the questions they're not?
posted by blag at 6:15 PM on September 30, 2006

I'm waiting to see the "administrative ruling" on blag, so we can all quickly return to snark.
posted by jak68 at 6:17 PM on September 30, 2006

Can you really not see the problem with comparing "arbitrary" decisions on a private website by that site's owner to totalitarianism of the highest degree? (Hint: Mathowie has no actual power over any but a tiny corner of your life.)
posted by dame at 6:24 PM on September 30, 2006

dame, yes I do see that. Thats why the analogy was "rhetorical." Not "literal". There's a difference there too, ya?
posted by jak68 at 6:34 PM on September 30, 2006

Looking back at the thread I linked earlier, I also found C_D's astonishingly good suggestion for category filters on the AskMe front page. Sweet baby jesus, giver of ponies: please can we get that implemented? It's fucking ace.
posted by blag at 6:36 PM on September 30, 2006

Rhetoric is supposed to serve your point, not make it utterly ridiculous. A comparison ought to highlight the compelling nature of an argument--augment it and fill it out. Apparently your rhetoric failed.
posted by dame at 6:38 PM on September 30, 2006 [1 favorite]

Sweet baby jesus, giver of ponies: please can we get that implemented?

Yeah, that looks quite useful and it'll keep most everyone happy.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:42 PM on September 30, 2006

obloquy, thanks for the crosslinks. I see this question has been brought up many times before, which makes it all the more astonishing that nothing has been done. Izzemeister's thread had some great ideas about banking unused questions, and there could even be a limit on how many can be banked. The limit could be as low as ONE.
The point being:
I don't think anyone wants to be able to ask two questions every week. It's just that currently each time you ask a question you prevent yourself from asking another for 7 days. It's really inflexible. Someone who hasn't asked anything for months and suddenly has two questions to ask is not hogging the resource.

The point is merely about flexibility, not about hogging more bandwidth than my fellow mefite citizen. This could be addressed in any number of ways and any of them would be an improvement. I see lots of good ideas have been suggested and have been relegated to "administrative rulings" and vanished.
posted by jak68 at 6:44 PM on September 30, 2006

but it is also capable of policing itself perhaps more than you give it credit for...

You must be new here.
posted by mcwetboy at 6:44 PM on September 30, 2006

Apparently your rhetoric failed.
I'm sorry I failed you Dame, I really am.
posted by jak68 at 6:45 PM on September 30, 2006

A simple change in policy would solve everything for everyone for all time.

I can't change the category/tag thing, but I just had to say HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA to this part anyhow. I wish you the best with your campaign. Now I will check you for sock puppets, please hold still....
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:55 PM on September 30, 2006

Wow--check out C_D's version of AskMe. Matt, can we have it, please?
posted by LarryC at 6:56 PM on September 30, 2006

jak68 writes "This whole process seems awfully arbitrary."

It's not arbitrary, it's been tweaked till it worked.

jak68 writes "Would Stalin oppose 4/month instead of 1/week? Whats the difference?"

More flexibility means more questions posted on average. IE: not a desirable change.
posted by Mitheral at 6:56 PM on September 30, 2006

MetaTalk: A simple change in policy would solve everything for everyone for all time.
posted by Mitheral at 7:00 PM on September 30, 2006

If its been tweaked, why not continue tweaking? Has it attained perfection? Jessamyn's post indicates thats not possible, so I'm guessing it hasnt and that there's more room for tweaking.

I see I've taken the wrong approach all along. Begging seems to be the way to go about doing this. I didnt realize that, having never posted to metatalk before. Very well. I'll wait the appropriate time period and revisit this issue (no doubt, through one of my many sockpuppets) later. You'll be able to recognize me: I'll be begging and saying "pretty pleeeease?" a lot, in as "cutsie" a way as possible. I'll offer a goat as a sacrifice. I'll be on bended knee. I'll pray - to you. By your grace, by your grace alone; perhaps this question - which keeps coming up - will finally get a serious consideration. By your grace alone...


posted by jak68 at 7:06 PM on September 30, 2006

Begging seems to be the way to go about doing this. I didnt realize that, having never posted to metatalk before. Very well.

jak68: you're very firmly wedging yourself into that most-hated category of Mefites: those who speak without bothering to spend a bit of time (a few weeks at least) discovering the community norms.

But by all means, please continue - we all know how this one ends and there's no Schadenfreude so sweet as that which ends in the final keening whine of the banned.
posted by Ryvar at 7:21 PM on September 30, 2006

It's possible anything could be improved, AskMe is no exception. I think you'll find though that further tweaking will be in the direction of further restricting question asking opportunities rather than increasing them.

Stuff like category filtering and unanswered question highlighting may be added. However they may not. That's Matt's call. However the flat chronological layout of Metafilter is a design feature rather than a overlooked deficiency in desperate need of "improvement".
posted by Mitheral at 7:21 PM on September 30, 2006

* buys marshmallows *
* sharpens pointy sticks *
* phones languagehat *
* gets answering machine *

um, 'hat? You, uh, should really get down here. I'm building a fire. I'll save you a marshmallow.
posted by yhbc at 7:30 PM on September 30, 2006

moderating your own thread instantly revokes your "member in good standing" status.
posted by crunchland at 7:35 PM on September 30, 2006

Shouldnt there be a way, where members in good standing can pay an additional $5 and get to ask another question before their 1 week auto-block is up?

That is a stupid idea.

Also: fuck off.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:36 PM on September 30, 2006

jak68's Profile
member since: February 17, 2006

Posting History:
MetaFilter: no posts and 10 comments
MetaTalk: 1 post and 12 comments
Ask MeFi: 17 questions and 193 answers
MeFi Music: no songs and no comments and no playlists
MeFi Projects: no post

No comment.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:40 PM on September 30, 2006

jak68: my apologies--- apparently my rhetoric failed as well. *sigh* but, like Hitler, I'm taking the lighthearted approach to it. ha ha.

perhaps this question - which keeps coming up - will finally get a serious consideration. By your grace alone...

the question, as linked above, has received very serious consideration. very serious consideration has provided time after time vehement consideration, and humorous consideration usually follows. the conclusion has remained the same. who makes that conclusion? the implementers. the deciders. the cabal.

take it up with them, if you can find 'em.
posted by carsonb at 8:01 PM on September 30, 2006

Ahem,
In an emergency - I get to decide if it's an emergency, I'm a kind and caring person, for reals, I will probably agree with you - I will loan anyone the use of my ask question for the week, assuming I've not posted one of my fairly rare questions. Not for regular abusers. Email is in profile.

Also:



Jesus, this episode of the wire taking forever to download. I'm time shifting it off the netflix dvds that are currently locked in the postoffice.
posted by Divine_Wino at 8:11 PM on September 30, 2006

is taking, is taking.
posted by Divine_Wino at 8:11 PM on September 30, 2006

4 per month IS DIFFERENT than 1 per week. The limit isn't there to prevent users from asking a lot of questions, it's to prevent a lot of questions from being asked at once. duh.
posted by blue_beetle at 9:30 PM on September 30, 2006

How about, with your $5, you get 5 questions? Once you run out, you pay another $5.
posted by aberrant at 10:07 PM on September 30, 2006

Okay, here's what you should do. You should let anyone who wants pay $5 as many times as they want to get an additional question a week. But you should let other people pay $5 to cancel people's extra-question five dollarses.
posted by aubilenon at 10:40 PM on September 30, 2006

Bankable questions. Yeah, I'll keep espousing it until it's either adopted or shot down.
posted by Eideteker at 11:00 PM on September 30, 2006

carsonb, eidetaker, aubilenon, aberrant, divine_wino, Mitheral: thank you for decent answers to a serious question.

fresh fish live: you pretty much know what i'd say to you, so i'll leave it to your imagination.

Even in this snark-filled thread I'm happy to see others willing to think about tweaks.

Sorry if I've offended with spurts of frustrated rhetorical sarcasm, but its rather frustrating to be faced with an anonymous board ("cabal" if you like; high school-ish clique, maybe) with anonymous rules who mainly want to get you off the tech support line as quickly as possible.

And if I may offer this: Askmefi seems to have an identity crisis. On the one hand it seems to imagine itself as democratic-communal: i.e., the 'hivemind' and its value, people getting together, an 'online community', etc, etc. On the other hand, "the cabal" seems to be violently opposed to any hint of continued growth or any attempt at continued inclusion. Which is, contradictorily, an anti-democratic, anti-communal gesture. "Lets not grow, lets not expand membership; on the contrary, lets close it down; lets shut down and limit access" etc etc is primarily what I'm hearing in response to my question.

Either this is an online community and will try to handle all the evolution and growth that would come with success, or it is a private group whose members sign up on the whims of an absolute and anonymous ruler. It cant be both, can it?

I really didnt know it was cabal-ruled. Guess I know now.
posted by jak68 at 11:43 PM on September 30, 2006

As someone who is a n00b and talks way too much, I would like to advise you that you are a n00b and you talk way too much. STFU n00b.
posted by evariste at 11:58 PM on September 30, 2006

jak68: don't worry too much about the cabal. just start offering people plo chops and you'll fit right in. (plo chops are the secret handshake. shh!)

also, don't listen to evariste at all, nor anyone who tells you there is no cabal.

in all seriousness, the biggest problem with AskMe when taken as a whole is question overload. changing it to a fee-based system is a bad solution, for various reasons. altering the posting limitations has been postulized to death, and deemed either impractical or ineffectual. (Eideteker's bankable questions proposal is intriguing, but this is the first time I've seen it and I'm too fucked up on a Saturday night to puzzle on about it. ) this, of course, rules out any requests for lighter question-asking restriction.
posted by carsonb at 12:26 AM on October 1, 2006

There is no cabal. Democracy and community are not the same thing. This place is not democratic or a socialist or any other such thing. It is a benign dictatorship. Sometimes the site owner takes the advice of some users on how to improve things, and sometimes he doesn't. Yes, asking nicely generally gets a better result than insulting or attacking. Your question was answered pretty simply early on. The question limits are in place for a reason. Responding that limits are somehow Stalinesque opened yourself up for ridicule. Your bitter responses afterwards just made things worse. You don't know what you are talking about. So, yeah, STFU n00b.
posted by team lowkey at 12:32 AM on October 1, 2006

jak68: Please just give it up. You got your answer within three comments and you continue to bitch about how unfair this is, while making yourself like like an idiot. The time to walk away was a long while ago.
posted by bob sarabia at 12:54 AM on October 1, 2006

The green is a precious resource. Don't use more than your share.
posted by LarryC

Y'know what might work? Spend some time around here making contributions to the community. It might not seem like it but you'll be building relationships. Keep an eye on your user page, people adding you as a contact can mean any number of things; it might mean that they find you to be an asshat, or that you are side-splittingly funny, or, even, that they appreciate your contributions. Sometimes they might even post urgent questions to The Green for you. Assuming it is really urgent.

Of course, you could just show up and start asking for something that has been covered umpteen times before.

Good luck with that.
posted by geekyguy at 1:14 AM on October 1, 2006

If you really need to ask more then one question a week, you are a needy bastard and should get some friends.
posted by Afroblanco at 2:15 AM on October 1, 2006

But... what if first I want Askme to identify a song by three words of misheard lyrics, and then later on that day after my question has been answered I decide to create a mix tape using my newfound knowledge? If I can't think of what to fill up the rest of the mix tape with, I could end up waiting a whole week for sweet relief.

Any solution which fixes the above problem is fine by me. Personally I favour some kind of Slashdot-like moderation system, but if there's any way to make this site more similar to Fark I would be open to suggestions.
posted by A Thousand Baited Hooks at 3:38 AM on October 1, 2006

its rather frustrating to be faced with an anonymous board ("cabal" if you like; high school-ish clique, maybe) with anonymous rules who mainly want to get you off the tech support line as quickly as possible.

Sorry to be a smartass. That said the reason I was a smartass is because we answer some variant of this question in MetaTalk every few weeks and the issue is usually loosely resolved as it was above: that is not a feature that is likely to be implemented. This site as currently configured, has the reverse problem of too many questions.

The other related issue is that AskMe could perhaps solve the "questions roll off the page too quickly" by implementing many of the solutions mentioned above and other solutions that have been mentioned before. CD has made a really interesting mockup of a "browse by category" feature, for example. That's a different issue and one which will likely be discussed more over time. However in the present time finding ways for people to ask more questions is a feature that is not likely to be impremented. In a community of 40,000 members, maybe 10% of whom use the site very regularly, there is some value to consistency over tweaking. If you look at the pattern of feature roll-out, you'll notice that the site is tweaked fairly often it's just not tweaked the way you would like it to be, but it's frequently tweaked the way someone would like it to be and that someone isn't always just mathowie or me. Please learn the difference between "people don't agree with my idea" and "mathowie = stalin"

I have to point out that acting disgruntled because people don't implement your great idea, when your great idea is one that has been discussed to death since the rise of AskMe doesn't really help anything. Claiming the rules or the rulemakers are "anonymous" or "soviet style" doesn't help anything. I can't talk about the so-called cabal one way or the other without sounding ridiculous, but I'll just say that there's been a long MetaTalk history on this and other issues. mathowie is in no way anonymous and at the end of the day he's the only one that can change the back-end code for issues like this

Either this is an online community and will try to handle all the evolution and growth that would come with success, or it is a private group whose members sign up on the whims of an absolute and anonymous ruler. It cant be both, can it?

The big lie in the promise of online community is that in almost every case that I know of someone has root and everyone else does not. Sites can be pretty community-minded even with this caveat, but it's not like anyone is pretending this isn't true. Just because the site doesn't handle growth to meet your own personal standards of how that growth should be handled doesn't mean that it's not evolving and growing.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:15 AM on October 1, 2006

On the one hand it seems to imagine itself as democratic-communal: i.e., the 'hivemind' and its value, people getting together, an 'online community', etc, etc. On the other hand, "the cabal" seems to be violently opposed to any hint of continued growth or any attempt at continued inclusion. Which is, contradictorily, an anti-democratic, anti-communal gesture. "Lets not grow, lets not expand membership; on the contrary, lets close it down; lets shut down and limit access" etc etc is primarily what I'm hearing in response to my question.

You are begging the question here by assuming that the idea you suggested would definitely benefit the people who use AskMe. People have already given you reasons why the idea was not a good one (basically, they make it less likely that any given question will be answered well.) Is that negative effect outweighed by the positive effect of getting to ask questions more frequently? I don't think it is. Being opposed to a bad idea is not a bad thing.

Stop with what you are calling "rhetorical analogies" or "rhetorical insults". They come off as unnecessary, exaggerated insults said in earnest.
posted by 23skidoo at 8:59 AM on October 1, 2006

Metafilter was often closed to new membership in its history. The site has probably more than doubled in membership since signups were reopened. With all of the new members, of which I am one, nothing stays on the front page for long on MeFi, MeTa, or AskMe. The moderators do their best to balance allowing all to contribute, while at the same time, giving those contributions a decent amount of "airtime" so that those same contributions actually mean something. What's the use of asking 4 questions in a week if 100 other people do the same thing? You'll get fewer answers to your question and your perceived utility of the site will decrease.

Jak68, your questions to answers ratio isn't bad, assuming you don't have a drawer full of sock puppets asking questions as well. But is your request really so important that you need to come in here and challenge the snarkiest subset of members on the site? You are doing yourself no favors (unless, of course, you just want to give your name some notoriety).

Also know that this so-called 'cabal' of members who guide the development of the site hold no more weight with the admins then those less vocal who choose to take their suggestions or problems directly to the admins through e-mail, or discuss things in calm, measured tones. MetaTalk is a great place to discuss ideas if you are just throwing them out there to discuss. However, if you think that just posting it to MetaTalk adds your idea to some sort of to-do list, you are sorely mistaken. Instead you'll find yourself thrown into a cage with a pack of howling, slavering hyenas.

Personally, I support reducing the question limit to one every ten days. There are plenty more resources on the internet to answer questions, and most can be answered by Google and a little research anyway.
posted by Roger Dodger at 9:17 AM on October 1, 2006

There are plenty more resources on the internet to answer questions, and most can be answered by Google and a little research anyway.

I've always wondered if a well-placed GOOGLE: HAVE YOU USED IT, MOTHERFUCKER? on the question form might help on this score.
posted by scody at 11:12 AM on October 1, 2006

I have never posted a question to askme with any of my sockpuppets. I'd be willing to share. Email in profile.
posted by shnoz-gobblin at 11:43 AM on October 1, 2006

scody writes "I've always wondered if a well-placed GOOGLE: HAVE YOU USED IT, MOTHERFUCKER? on the question form might help on this score."

I've always found that for signs to be of any use in places that people regularly frequent, they have to be be changed often or they won't be noticed. Pink flashing gif one day, 17th cent. engraving the next..
posted by peacay at 11:57 AM on October 1, 2006

I actually really like the idea of allowing no more than 4 questions in a calendar month, as this will slightly reduce the maximum possible number of questions per user, but it would be best to do this in conjunction with the current one per 7 days rule, not instead of it.

This 10 days or 2 weeks thing, it's just a bit too miserly, I think. Though from my own posting history, one per year would appear to be adequate.
posted by The Monkey at 2:24 PM on October 1, 2006

Why pay an extra $5 when there are other free forums around the net to ask half these questions? There are travel forums for "must-see landmarks," there are tech forums for PC problems, etc...
posted by IndigoRain at 3:21 PM on October 1, 2006

IndigoRain, why ask strangers when you can ask the sarcastic, arrogant, hilarious, brilliant assholes here?

If I ever go on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire, I'll use my lifeline to have someone post the question for me on Ask MetaFilter.
posted by evariste at 3:56 PM on October 1, 2006

Its because the green IS a precious resource, that many of us want to use it more.

What a hilariously blockheaded thing to say. This guy is apparently incapable of understanding the simple notion that "community" requires respect for others and at least some restraint of one's own selfish impulses. And he's lecturing *us* about being "anti-communal"?

Good lord.
posted by mediareport at 5:05 PM on October 1, 2006

um, 'hat? You, uh, should really get down here. I'm building a fire. I'll save you a marshmallow.

*runs in panting*

What did I miss? Has pushy n00b flamed out without me? Where's my marshmallow?
posted by languagehat at 5:38 PM on October 1, 2006

2 per week is too much?!
Waaaaaay too much, if you ask me (which you didn't, but whatever). Two per month seems like too much for the average reasonably intelligent person to ask, if you ask me (which, as noted previously, you didn't).

So I've made two points today
Yes:
1 - you are an idiot
2 - you don't listen.

Glad to see you're learning.
posted by dg at 5:49 PM on October 1, 2006

i don't think there's anything wrong with sock puppets ... as long as they are properly labeled.
posted by lester's sock puppet at 7:42 AM on October 2, 2006

What did I miss? Has pushy n00b flamed out without me? Where's my marshmallow?

I gave him a few hard shoves towards the fire, but he was running his mouth so that he didn't notice.
posted by carsonb at 8:19 AM on October 2, 2006

What did I miss? Has pushy n00b flamed out without me? Where's my marshmallow?

It was like that scene in Wayne's World where Wayne storms off the set of the show, and a panicked Garth has to take over. We roughed up the narcissistic little wanker as best as we could--but if you had been here, it could have been epic.
posted by LarryC at 8:25 AM on October 2, 2006

AskMe is not the only place on the internet to ask questions and get them answered.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 9:06 AM on October 2, 2006

I am buying a home for the first time and I'm sorry but I had 2 important questions in under a week. I posted the second one to MetaChat and asked some kind soul to cross-post it to the Green for me. I was kindly accommodated.
posted by scarabic at 9:42 AM on October 2, 2006

Metafilter: a cage with a pack of howling, slavering hyenas.
posted by Famous at 12:31 PM on October 2, 2006