Could we outlaw cryptic posts & headlines?

October 26, 2006 6:24 PM

I posted this double in large part because the headline for this post from a few days before was so cryptic that it passed under my radar. I'm aware that there can be no official policy outlawing cryptic posts (I'm not arguing for a strict policy, either), but such doubles are bound to occur when the front pages are filled with non-descriptive links. Judging by this and other comments in my thread, I'm not alone in wishing that folks would provide a bit more info with their FPPs. At the least, it could save wasted time on the part of posters and readers alike. Wondering what the wider MeFi community thinks about this.
posted by flapjax at midnite to etiquette/policy at 6:24 PM (49 comments total)

Well, yeah, but some people don't think about those things or they thing about it TOO much, trying to come off as clever.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:31 PM on October 26, 2006

I am the golden maple syrup pooling over the oh-so-correct flapjax on this issue, slowly dripping over the edge of the delicious point he's making.

I want to be on the front page of Metafilter. I don't want anyone to read what I wrote. Is that the thought process?
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 6:32 PM on October 26, 2006

You posted a double post. It's OK, it happens to the best of us. You'll survive.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 6:37 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]

Yeah, I had a MetaTalk post deleted because I linked to something stupid about Kottke. I felt like a frickin' idiot. Happens. (All too regularly, in my case.)
posted by cgc373 at 6:41 PM on October 26, 2006

I'm with ThePinkSuperhero. You're writing about posting a double as if it were a painful fate to be avoided at all costs, or a crime bearing a horrible punishment. But it's a normal mistake, it happens, and the admins cleaned up after you. No harm, no foul, eh?
posted by nebulawindphone at 6:41 PM on October 26, 2006

It happens, but I do wish people would stop trying to turn their MetaFilter FPPs into beautiful unique snowflakes.
posted by Kickstart70 at 6:42 PM on October 26, 2006

You posted a double post. It's OK, it happens to the best of us. You'll survive.

Hey Pink, I'm not worried about that. I've survived far worse, lemme tell you. I'm hoping folks will offer their opinions on the point of this MetaTalk post, which was not "I was deleted!" but which is "cryptic FPPs".
posted by flapjax at midnite at 6:43 PM on October 26, 2006

I stand in stark opposition to TPS and NWP. Flapjax doesn't seem to be bent out of shape about this, and he's right-- unclear descriptors diminish the usefulness of an FPP.

That said, flapjax, "Scot Adams" might have been a better search than"spasmodic dysphonia."
posted by ibmcginty at 6:46 PM on October 26, 2006

beautiful unique snowflakes

My snowflakes are punker than yours.
posted by bardic at 6:53 PM on October 26, 2006

Maybe, ibmcginty, but "Scott Adams" would return all the Scott Adams–related stuff on MetaFilter. I'd probably have searched for something more specific, as well, and maybe been bitten. On another hand . . . though, admittedly, mathowie's post was a few years ago.
posted by cgc373 at 6:55 PM on October 26, 2006

You know, there was a suggestion that might help this problem only a day or two ago. I'm pretty sure it has been thoroughly shot down, but somebody might have missed it..
posted by Chuckles at 6:57 PM on October 26, 2006

I dunno, I like a nice cryptic post from time to time. And, to be fair, in this case, the cryptic link had a very descriptive title. And decent tags.
posted by jack_mo at 7:00 PM on October 26, 2006

The best detection algorithm for double posts is the users of MetaFilter.
posted by smackfu at 7:13 PM on October 26, 2006

I'm a fan of dp's myself.
posted by bardic at 7:17 PM on October 26, 2006

I'm definitely against cyrptic FPPs- in fact, I take a stand against them everyday by not clicking them and reading them. A girl only has so much time.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 7:21 PM on October 26, 2006 [3 favorites]

I came very close to posting a double (this link) three days ago, and while the google and yahoo searches failed me, the simple search of tags ("watches") saved me.

I hate that people post things without tags, or what I deem insufficient tags, but a simple tag search of "scottadams" may have prevented the double.

There's not much shame in it, though, and really, the OP should've tagged the original post with "Dilbert".
posted by Ufez Jones at 7:26 PM on October 26, 2006

Dilbert tag definately. No harm no foul. NEXT!
posted by snsranch at 7:42 PM on October 26, 2006

Today I wore a long sleeved dark brown v-neck knit shirt. It looked nice - low key, but not so casual as a t-shirt. It was rainy out.
posted by thirteenkiller at 8:33 PM on October 26, 2006

So, thirteenkiller, it's quite clear now that you're a wiseass, but how do you feel about cryptic posts?
posted by flapjax at midnite at 9:08 PM on October 26, 2006

I resent being referred to as wider.
posted by shoesfullofdust at 9:49 PM on October 26, 2006

Thirteenkiller stalked slowly down the street, clad in a long-sleeved, dark brown v-neck knit shirt and not much else. It was raining, lightly, and the water beaded up on her hair, her shoulders, the tip of her nose.

Something darted across the street ahead of her. She froze. Was it an unlucky number? She flipped down her visor and warmed up her plasma cannon.

The targetting data flicked across her field of vision in bursts of green and yellow.

6 kilograms.

42 meters away.

2.4 meters per second on an almost perfect heading of 090.

She acquired, locked on, plasma cannon tracking perfectly.

But what was it? Was it what she hoped for, what she hunted? She had to know before she fired.

Her free hand feathered the tab at the corner of the visor, and the target began to come into clearer focus.

It was a number. That much she could tell.

But was it an unlucky one?

She took a deep breath, half let it out, held it, her finger tensed on the firing stud of the plasma gun, waiting for the digits to finally become clear.

55787. Not a target. She let out the rest of her half-held breath, relaxing.

Just a cryptic post.

She had nothing against cryptic posts.

Thirteenkiller stalked slowly down the street, a destroyer of unlucky numbers, clad in a dark brown v-neck knit shirt and not much else.
posted by dersins at 10:39 PM on October 26, 2006 [2 favorites]

is this my first MetaTalk callout? Should I stop around or something?

More seriously, guys and gals: this was like my fifth FPP, ever. If you've got suggestions for how to improve my style aside from what's already been mentioned in this and the previous MetaTalk thread, I'm open to criticism, constructive, and hateful.

I am also here to have my grammar corrected.
posted by onalark at 10:46 PM on October 26, 2006

*stomp* around or something
posted by onalark at 10:46 PM on October 26, 2006

You posted a double post. It's OK, it happens to the best of us. You'll survive.

Not the point.

The point is, if you're gonna make a post with a cryptic writeup, at least tag it well enough to prevent dupes.
posted by StrasbourgSecaucus at 10:56 PM on October 26, 2006

Thank you, Strasbourg.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 11:00 PM on October 26, 2006

One good strategy for avoiding a double is to put your main url into the url field of the "post a link" page and click "preview". The internal search engine will tell you if it's appeared before and give you a link to the post or comment.

I do this as soon as I find something that I think might make a good post, before I even start thinking about writing it up. I also do regular searches, and tag searches, though, because if it's a mirror or the address has changed, it won't show as a dupe.

As for the main question, I understand some people's frustration with posts that aren't completely straightforward, but I don't like the idea of trying to enforce strict conformity to style in this regard. We already have so many implicit standards, and so many people so eager to enforce them, that trying to make a post can feel like negotiating a mined field. I also personally appreciate a bit of variety and at least some latitude for occasional expressions of individuality.
posted by taz at 11:32 PM on October 26, 2006 [3 favorites]

While we're hashing this out, I think the newbie mistake I made was making my descriptive "Scott Adams claims he's cured Spasmodic Dysphona" sentence the title and using something a little more arbitrary for the link description.

Something just doesn't feel right about the title not showing up anywhere on the front page. Is there a way to make this fact clearer on the "Post a link" page? Alternatively, to put the title on the front page?
posted by onalark at 11:53 PM on October 26, 2006

I agree with flapjax.
posted by grouse at 12:02 AM on October 27, 2006

Actually, onalark, IMHO, swapping your title and your link description would have been a good idea. I think that's the way a lot of MeFites would've done it: "Scott Adams claims he's cured Spasmodic Dysphonia" (or something like that) as your front page link, and "Is optimism enough?" as your title. And, BTW, this MeTa thread is not intended, exactly, as a callout against you individually. I was thinking more of a "general discussion on general practices" sort of vibe.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 12:14 AM on October 27, 2006

Unless Matt turns the post page into something that resembles MadLibs, we can never regulate how other people make their posts. It's free-form, and as a result, people form freely. As a result, we get one-word, one-links, and we get blockquoted, title-texted tretises with a hundred links. So, be happy with your frustration because that's all you get. Sorry.
posted by crunchland at 4:04 AM on October 27, 2006

I do wish people would stop the 'unique snowflake' crap. How about 'perfect little flower'? Or 'singularly iridescent butterfly? Something, anything but that snowflake thing. It was good once in that film.
posted by econous at 4:21 AM on October 27, 2006

we can never regulate how other people make their posts.

This particular MeFite agrees with you, crunch, as stated in my original post here. Official regulation of this sort of thing would be a drag. But that doesn't mean we can't discuss the pros and cons of posting style amongst ourselves, does it? This kind of "just shut up and be happy" sort of response doesn't really add anything particularly constructive to the debate, does it?

I do wish people would stop the 'unique snowflake' crap.

Whether it's snowflake, butterfly or what-have-you, it was completely misplaced in the context of this thread.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 5:12 AM on October 27, 2006

Tolya Garianov wrote
at 2:22am
WE ARE WE ARE... THE YOUTH OF THE NATION!!!!!
posted by thirteenkiller at 5:37 AM on October 27, 2006

*throws a ball of unique snowflakes at thirteenkiller*
posted by mediareport at 6:05 AM on October 27, 2006

I hate cryptic posts¹. There. I said it.

¹Except in the rare cases when they are simply too good to hate. Then I love them.
posted by sveskemus at 6:12 AM on October 27, 2006

if one reads every single post on the blue, double posts are no longer a problem.

I think the points mentioned above about the post title are spot on. a lot of unintentional ambiguity could be avoided if the post preview function carried just a bit more information, or was clarified slightly. the way a post is currently previewed is misleading, or maybe only confusing. the post preview page should indicate that a post will look different when displayed on the MeFi front page and on the /mefi/###### index page. right now it only indicates what the post will look like on the index page ("Here's how your link is going to look on the index page." is the text on the preview page). Maybe there should be two previews on the preview page--- one for the post index, and one for the front page. then again, there's only so much one can do. and working on the post title preview page issue does nothing for the willfully obscure.

which brings me back to the simple solution: read every post.
posted by carsonb at 7:16 AM on October 27, 2006

Sure, flapjax. We can talk about it. We can also talk about world peace and overcoming poverty. It might make people indifferent to their posting styles consider changing their ways, and it will make people who agree with you feel better, but in the end, there's no way to change the minds of 40,000 users, or even 1% of them by talking about it here in metatalk.
posted by crunchland at 7:16 AM on October 27, 2006

the original post was way too cryptic, it's just a bad habit some people have (I guess I've been guilty of it too, in the past). you cannot be too clear, really.

and yes, Dilbert still sucks
posted by matteo at 7:44 AM on October 27, 2006

I was gonna ask about that snowflake thing. Did it come from the Fight Club or did they take it from somewhere else and "made it famous"?
posted by micayetoca at 8:34 AM on October 27, 2006

Metafilter: a ball of unique snowflakes.

(and I mean that in the most positive sense)

(I think...)
posted by flapjax at midnite at 8:53 AM on October 27, 2006

Oh yeah? Well I eat snowflakes for breakfast!

But then, I am half-Canadian.
posted by gigawhat? at 10:00 AM on October 27, 2006

I'm a fan of dp's myself.

Someone here at work has the license plate "DP FAN".

Took me forever to figure out that probably meant "Detroit Pistons".
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 12:31 PM on October 27, 2006

I do wish people would stop the 'unique snowflake' crap. How about 'perfect little flower'? Or 'singularly iridescent butterfly? Something, anything but that snowflake thing. It was good once in that film.

In fact, it was so good, that it became a part of our culture and popular vernacular. Call it an homage to the brilliance of the line (which I mangle constantly) and sit back, happy that you witnessed something at the beginning that will live by word of mouth for hundreds, perhaps thousands, of years.
posted by Kickstart70 at 12:52 PM on October 27, 2006

I'm a fan of dp's myself.

Took me forever to figure out that probably meant "Double Penetration".
posted by econous at 1:58 PM on October 27, 2006

That's disgusting. Obviously he is a cinematographophile, or a fan of Directors of Photography.
posted by jtron at 3:13 PM on October 27, 2006

Naw man, double penetration. Preferably ear canal and nostril. Hawt.
posted by bardic at 4:31 PM on October 27, 2006

mmm, nasal sex.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 7:50 PM on October 27, 2006

While I have to admit to enjoyinjg Dilbert, Scott Adams' blog is of the evil, professional troll calibre. I prefer the original Scott Adams, who gave me the first adventure I didn't have to play on a mainframe.
posted by Sparx at 2:06 AM on October 28, 2006

The hive-mind craps, yes - unique snowflakes. I'm just sayin'.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 4:39 AM on October 28, 2006