deletion, why?!

November 21, 2006 10:14 AM

Loudon Dreps: self-link, no. Friend-link, yes. Was this post deleted because it sucked, or because I know the guy? If both, I concede. If only because of association, is that transgression articulated somewhere? I couldn’t find it.
posted by Milkman Dan to etiquette/policy at 10:14 AM (30 comments total)

I agree. How is this diferent than linking to something off the projects page that I liked? It's not commercial or anything. I call shenanigans.
posted by doctor_negative at 10:32 AM on November 21, 2006

A shitty link, but the listed reason for deletion seems somewhat wrong to me, for the reasons that doctor_negative outlined above.
posted by dead_ at 10:39 AM on November 21, 2006

The policy on linking to a friend's site is based on the underlying assumption that you are unlikely to be objective about the subject matter, and has been discussed here many times before.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 10:41 AM on November 21, 2006

Make that "...objective about the quality of the subject matter".
posted by mr_crash_davis at 10:45 AM on November 21, 2006

and the post sucked.

Stop linking to it all over metafilter. It's like farting, and then reminding people every five minutes that you farted.
posted by Baby_Balrog at 10:48 AM on November 21, 2006

I don't think I've seen a myspace post last on mefi, they all seem to suck. That it's your friend most likely clouds your vision on how good it is.
posted by mathowie at 10:50 AM on November 21, 2006

And just to be clear: what is so amazing about a default myspace page with three friends? If there is some amazing writing there, why not link to the specific examples. I'm sure myspace can do permalinks to blog posts, right? Why didn't you show people why it was so great by linking to all the spectacular entries I missed by looking at a default myspace page?
posted by mathowie at 10:51 AM on November 21, 2006

Hoof hearted?
Ice melted.
posted by Floydd at 10:51 AM on November 21, 2006

Linking to your friend's MySpace account smells like a self-link, in that you are promoting something you have a personal connection to that is not remotely the best of the web.
posted by voidcontext at 10:56 AM on November 21, 2006

The don't-link-a-friend prohibition differs from Projects: with a Projects post, there is no restricted personal-relationship vector to the front page. Someone posts to Projects, and any old mefite can see it and throw it on the blue if they think it's an interesting site. The possibility exists that the posting mefite is a personal friend of the Projects poster, but it's hardly assumed—I've posted stuff by folks I knew only vaguely by handle, without reservation, and I've declined to post stuff by folks I rather like a lot.

Posting for a friend, though, puts you in the position of being the sole channel by which their work gets judged for fitness, and creates a sort of unbalancing pressure on you to help them out. With Projects, no one is under any social gun; the fruit is hanging low; and, notably, most Projects posts don't see the front page.
posted by cortex at 11:01 AM on November 21, 2006

I hate myspace but tried to read a couple of the blog posts. They were so bland I was certain Louden Dreps was a heteronym of Milkman Dan as I couldn't imagine anyone else linking to it.

The description provided in the FPP sounded like an experiment that would be both interesting and unlikely. Unfortunately, it was just the latter.
posted by dobbs at 11:35 AM on November 21, 2006

The policy on linking to a friend's site is based on the underlying assumption that you are unlikely to be objective about the subject matter, and has been discussed here many times before.

Yes, and this should be explained more clearly on the Post page. Self-linking isn't only about linking to yourself, but it's easy to see how people get that impression.

Also, I still think whiny MeTa threads about why somebody's beautiful post was deleted should be deleted instantly. If you want an explanation, send Matt an e-mail. Unless, of course, you're planning to use such a post to flame out spectacularly, in which case just let me know in advance so I can have the popcorn ready.
posted by languagehat at 11:44 AM on November 21, 2006

whiny MeTa threads.... should be deleted instantly...

Why -aren't- stupid MeTas deleted? I was under the impression that they were left as warnings for others, or some such.
posted by anotherpanacea at 11:57 AM on November 21, 2006

Holy fucking fuck! It's like HP Lovecraft without the racism and creepy atmosphere... It's like Ignatius J. Reilly of A Confederacy of Dunces without the funny bits... it's like... it's like... a really bad post.
posted by Mister_A at 12:02 PM on November 21, 2006

2006 has been a lousy year for flameouts.
posted by eyeballkid at 12:38 PM on November 21, 2006

I agree, I think the policy should be that one is not allowed to self-link their own deleted MeFi post on MeTa, for precisely the same reason that FPP self-link are not allowed: there's no hope of the objectivity that might, might, save us all from shitty shitty posts.
posted by OmieWise at 12:43 PM on November 21, 2006

Or Matt and Jessamyn could create a "whydeleted@mefi" email address that would reply with an auto responder similar to a lot of tech support email accts.

"Your [post/comment/question] was probably deleted for the following reasons. Please read them over carefully, and if you still have questions..."

Yeah nevermind.
posted by routergirl at 1:01 PM on November 21, 2006

I'm glad for this MeTa thread, because I missed the thread.

As for the actual link, I didn't make it past this: "I don't watch a lot of movies because I don't possess any of the technology necessary to watch a film."

Overwrought!
posted by The God Complex at 1:03 PM on November 21, 2006

I don't find this to be a particularly whiny thread. The poster asked for clarification on a policy issue that isn't clearly specified in the posting regs. He even "conceded" the deletion within the question. This seems like exactly what MeTa should be for.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:05 PM on November 21, 2006

Thanks for the defense, Florence. Although I'll add an “indeed” to the chorus of "this post sucked." A single-link Myspace post is a trivial thing to bring to everybody’s attention. It wasn’t helped by being couched in such laudatory language, and it was crippled further by the fact that this writer is a friend.

Anyway, points taken (especially that clever bit about farting from the Balrog). Consider the white flag waved. Next time, I’ll do better to aim for diversity and objectivity (and plain old "interestingness"). Who gets to delete this?
posted by Milkman Dan at 1:21 PM on November 21, 2006

I don't find this to be a particularly whiny thread. The poster asked for clarification on a policy issue that isn't clearly specified in the posting regs. He even "conceded" the deletion within the question. This seems like exactly what MeTa should be for.

Agreed. Milkman Dan has been nothing but gracious. Which is too bad, because I wanted to shiv him with a sharpened toothbrush :(
posted by The God Complex at 1:27 PM on November 21, 2006

As did I, God. As. Did. I!
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:32 PM on November 21, 2006

I know, way to spoil it Dan :)

Peace out!
posted by Mister_A at 1:33 PM on November 21, 2006

(He really has been. Probably most gracious "why was I deleted?" I have ever seen. Not that I've seen a lot here, but still.)
posted by routergirl at 1:51 PM on November 21, 2006

Isn't anyone going to say it?

Fine, then.

I hate you, Milkman Dan.

Whew, now we can all sleep tonight.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 1:52 PM on November 21, 2006

Heh. It was a bit like whistling all but the last note of a tune, wasn't it? "Shave and a haircut - two..."
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:58 PM on November 21, 2006

Every time I see this thread, I think it says "London Drops", and I think it's something I should be interested in, and then I realise that it's not.
posted by chrismear at 2:23 PM on November 21, 2006

2007 flameouts in 2007! Who's with me?
posted by blue_beetle at 3:35 PM on November 21, 2006

I don't find this to be a particularly whiny thread.

Yeah, I know, I was being totally unfair to Milkman Dan, partly out of accumulated irritation at these threads and partly, I'm sure, out of a desire to see him fly off the handle and flame out. Damn you, Milkman Dan, for being so reasonable!
posted by languagehat at 3:36 PM on November 21, 2006

I easily transferred my own ire to IRFH for his defence of Dan and his insistence on a reasonable discourse. Watch your back, Flo!
posted by OmieWise at 3:40 PM on November 21, 2006