Comments as votes?

March 3, 2007 11:18 AM

Is it fair to consider the number of comments an FPP receives as an indication of community interest in the post? If so, then it is a pity that eustacescrubb's great find (a real best of the web IMHO) gets only a handful of comments whilst yet another FPP about Ann Coulter frothing at the mouth generates so many.
posted by three blind mice to MetaFilter-related at 11:18 AM (72 comments total)

It has often been so.
posted by mcwetboy at 11:23 AM on March 3, 2007

The more things change, the more they stay the same.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 11:25 AM on March 3, 2007

I'd say it's not fair to consider the number of comment an FPP receives as an indication of community interest in the post except for very specific definitions of "community interest". Threads that invite chatty commentary get chatty commentary, period.
posted by cortex at 11:29 AM on March 3, 2007 [2 favorites]

My favourite posts were always Plep's, and they never got many comments.
posted by Space Coyote at 11:30 AM on March 3, 2007

Just because I find something neat doesn't mean that I have anything to say about it.

I'd argue there's a limit — say, 100 comments — past which you have a good indication that it's not a great FPP. Does anybody find themselves returning to the infamous mushroom thread to click on its links?

(And then the exception to that rule, I'd say, would be if somebody like EricB drops into the fray with one of his trademarked +5 Informative comments. Goddamn, that guy rocks.)
posted by cribcage at 11:31 AM on March 3, 2007

Is it fair to consider the number of comments an FPP receives as an indication of community interest in the post?

Good god no. No. A post with a lot of comments just means it's controversial or flamebait. It has nothing to do with the quality of the link. A post with just 10 "thanks, that was great" comments pretty much indicates a perfect post.
posted by Rhomboid at 11:39 AM on March 3, 2007 [1 favorite]

Is it fair to consider the number of comments an FPP receives as an indication of community interest in the post?

Nope. More often than not it just means people are arguing.

If so, then it is a pity that eustacescrubb's great find (a real best of the web IMHO) gets only a handful of comments whilst yet another FPP about Ann Coulter frothing at the mouth generates so many.

I'm convinced that we've been visited by aliens on numerous occassions, but actions/people/posts such as the above convince the aliens to just be quiet and zoom off to find some respectable planet to bring to all the good parties. Ann Coulter and her ilk have cost us warp drives, teleportion, holo decks and giant wookies.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:56 AM on March 3, 2007

I think there's other factors. Of my two most recent posts one has 13 comments (two by me) and 4 favorites, 3 from people who didn't comment. The other has 70 odd comments but only 2 favorites, neither from commenters. Not sure what that means, but there's something about a comment to favorite to participation formula in there somewhere.
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 12:00 PM on March 3, 2007

This dead horse has been beaten so often it's achieved a fine, even froth. If your point is to praise eustacescrubb's post, yeah, it's a nice post, but do we really want a new MeTa post for every MeFi post someone thinks is underappreciated? If your real point is to bitch about bardic's post, don't cover it with a Miguelesque "I'm just wondering what you all think about this contrast" figleaf. And while I'm at it, I'll point out that it is not just "another FPP about Ann Coulter," it's a post about how a major Republican candidate is embracing Coulter even as she spews venom. If Coulter shot Hillary dead, would you object to talking about it because it's just another Coulter story?
posted by languagehat at 12:01 PM on March 3, 2007

I kinda thought the Favorites were a good way to tell what people were interested in, but maybe I'm weird that way.
posted by cerebus19 at 12:08 PM on March 3, 2007

No, I think the Favorites feature generally reflects the community interest (at least in the case of Posts, rather than comments). In this case, they are both rather low, but: eustacescrubb's has 6 favorites, and the Ann Coulter post only has 1. This makes perfect sense to me, since, tomorrow I won't want to read the delirious comments in the Ann Coulter post (which are really the only attraction), but in 6 months I might want to check out that website eustacescrubb posted again.
posted by synaesthetichaze at 12:11 PM on March 3, 2007

After posting, I can see that a bunch of other people already said that... great.
posted by synaesthetichaze at 12:11 PM on March 3, 2007

I generally find the relationship of comments to quality to be inversely proportional. The less comments the better the post.
posted by dobbs at 12:16 PM on March 3, 2007

three blind mice posted "Is it fair to consider the number of comments an FPP receives as an indication of community interest in the post?"

No.
posted by Bugbread at 12:17 PM on March 3, 2007

Probably a better indicator is the number of favorites, which at the moment would tend to indicate that eustacescrubb's post is 1700% better than Ann Coulter.
posted by ikkyu2 at 12:20 PM on March 3, 2007

It's time for reader-submitted tags, visually different from the main tags and placed below them. "underappreciatedpost" would be a good one. (In the same way, the "this song appears on the following playlist" thing in Music can be quite descriptive and useful.)
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 12:24 PM on March 3, 2007

The real question at hand:

Does anyone even consider Metafilter a place for "Best of the Web" anymore (or was it ever designed that way)? It's really just a place to share links and news of the day. With their somewhat collective filter (and minus their self-aggrandizing posts), I consider BoingBoing much closer to having a BotW vision.

If Matt, Jessamyn and the others had the time and inclination for BotW, this would be one slooooow place.
posted by DonnieSticks at 12:28 PM on March 3, 2007

dobbs writes "The less comments the better the post."

Thus, Jim Jones' soliloquy was in a sense the Best Post Evar.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 12:31 PM on March 3, 2007 [1 favorite]

eustacescrubb's great find: 7 users marked as a favorite
yet another FPP about Ann Coulter: 1 user marked as a favorite
posted by mathowie at 12:41 PM on March 3, 2007

DonnieSticks writes "Does anyone even consider Metafilter a place for 'Best of the Web' anymore"

Yes.

(You only asked "does anyone", and I do, so that "yes" is pretty damn incontrovertible. Now, if you meant "do most people" or "do anyone", well, that's open to a bit more discussion.)
posted by Bugbread at 12:44 PM on March 3, 2007

I think the ones with 40 to 50 comments tend to be my favorite posts. There is enough interest to spark discussion, without turning into a 100+ monster of people arguing.

Though I've seem many with less comments which are excellent and many with more that were outstanding. It just seems like that 50 comments mark tends to be the sweet spot.
posted by quin at 12:45 PM on March 3, 2007

Favorites aren't that great an indicator either. For instance, most of the times that I favorite a post it is for future reference. So most are useful things, or something large that I might not have time to tackle for awhile. A good post is like pornography, you know it when you see it.
posted by caddis at 12:46 PM on March 3, 2007

I think favorites can indicate community interest, but they more often indicate a post that people wish to return to later – often for reference purposes – not necessarily because it was fascinating.

My most-favorited posts are not the posts I'm most proud of. I tend to be interested in a well-researched post that links to a number of perspectives on a topic. Or sometimes a single-link post to a really unusual and interesting site or article. But the posts that I've made that get the most favorites do not fill either of these criteria. They are simply references that people might want to use again.

For example, I posted a bunch of links about how to write well. It got tons of favorites, not because it was a creative or fascinating post, but because all the aspiring writers on metafilter thought they might want to use the writing tips at a later time. At least that's my assumption of why it got those favorites.
posted by serazin at 12:49 PM on March 3, 2007

Oops. Caddis said it shorter and better before I finished typing.
posted by serazin at 12:49 PM on March 3, 2007

Is it fair to consider the number of comments an FPP receives as an indication of community interest in the post? If so, then it is a pity that eustacescrubb's great find (a real best of the web IMHO) gets only a handful of comments whilst yet another FPP about Ann Coulter frothing at the mouth generates so many.

Please take your rhetorical questions to metachat. Or rather, anywhere other than here.
posted by tkolar at 12:50 PM on March 3, 2007

The less comments the better the post.

Because there is only one kind of post that is right for here. No, ifs, ands or buts. The post about the World Trade Center attack and its thread that unfolded as it happened, therefore, were just about the worst things ever posted here. The Seattle earthquake post was another debacle that will be a stain forever on this site.
posted by y2karl at 1:16 PM on March 3, 2007

(You only asked "does anyone", and I do, so that "yes" is pretty damn incontrovertible. Now, if you meant "do most people" or "do anyone", well, that's open to a bit more discussion.)

Heh, Mad Hatter logic is taking over MetaFilter.

But seriously, yes, I do consider MeFi "Best of the Web." Posts like this, this, or this are the best thing on the internet, as far as I can tell.

The BoingBoing comparison offends me. I like Cory as much as the next guy, but saying that a bunch of posts about geek-chic paraphernalia is the best thing the internet has to offer is crazy.
posted by roll truck roll at 1:27 PM on March 3, 2007

If your real point is to bitch about bardic's post, don't cover it with a Miguelesque "I'm just wondering what you all think about this contrast" figleaf.

WTF is your problem languagehat? If your real point is? I think you need to stop breaking your pills (and my sentences) into pieces. The question was clear and concise. Matthowie's reply was helpful (thanks Matt). Please make a note of it.

Favorites is an indication, but as caddis observes not everyone uses favorites as a means of ranking an FPP.

If I make an FPP and get 5 comments, I am not encouraged to make one which is similar. The more subtle problem is how do I know a post is great BEFORE I enter into it. Perhaps the possibility to rank a post "hot or not" that would show in the blue?
posted by three blind mice at 1:41 PM on March 3, 2007

The BoingBoing comparison offends me.

Why does it offend you? You're not getting anything from this site (ie. money from ad clicks) that would merit any personal feelings on your part if there is a perceived misrepresentation of the scope of metafilter.
posted by Burhanistan at 1:42 PM on March 3, 2007

Burhanistan writes "Why does it offend you? You're not getting anything from this site (ie. money from ad clicks) that would merit any personal feelings on your part if there is a perceived misrepresentation of the scope of metafilter."

I can understand why an emotional connection to MeFi would result in a slight against it offending someone, but why would an economic connection to MeFi result in finding something offensive? "Offend" is primarily an emotional response, no? I get money from my employer, but I'm not offended when someone insults the company. I don't get any money from my wife, but I'm offended when someone insults her.

My guess is that roll truck roll feels an emotional attachment to MetaFilter, and therefore a perceived slight offends him. I can understand why you might not empathize or sympathize, but do you really not even understand why he might be offended?
posted by Bugbread at 1:51 PM on March 3, 2007

bugbread: no, I can understand. But its silly to have an emotional connection to this site.
posted by Burhanistan at 1:53 PM on March 3, 2007

If Coulter shot Hillary dead, would you object to talking about it because it's just another Coulter story?

Yes. If Coulter spontaneously combusted I would object to talking about Coulter, out of fear she would derive some satisfaction from it in Hell.
posted by veggieboy at 2:03 PM on March 3, 2007

But its silly to have an emotional connection to this site.

This "site" is actually a community of people so it doesn't seem at all silly that some members have an emotional connection to it. If someone insults your friends you get offended, no?
posted by three blind mice at 2:06 PM on March 3, 2007

You guys. Don't make me leave this place for College Humor.

An lot of MetaFilter is drivel. An awful lot of Boingboing is drivel. Your comparison was funny. My saying I was offended by your comparison is funny.
posted by roll truck roll at 2:07 PM on March 3, 2007

its silly to have an emotional connection to this site.

Why? I spend half my day here.
posted by poxuppit at 2:08 PM on March 3, 2007

Ok, so the general consensus seems to be that the number of comments and favorites is not an indicator of the FPPs.

Now, how about in MetaFilter Music? How does that work there? People have said before that they don't feel comfortable commenting on other people's work or that the way we post it doesn't exactly invite conversation. So, do the comments reflect something or nothing at all in Metafilter Music?
posted by micayetoca at 2:24 PM on March 3, 2007

It seems to me that, all cortex aside, Music doesn't quite get enough traffic for a rubric like this to apply.

In order for a discussion to take place, someone needs to start the discussion, frame it. 99% of the time, you can't do that very well if you're personally involve. Isn't that why there are no comments in Projects?
posted by roll truck roll at 2:34 PM on March 3, 2007

involved
posted by roll truck roll at 2:34 PM on March 3, 2007

eustacescrubb's great find: 7 users marked as a favorite
yet another FPP about Ann Coulter: 1 user marked as a favorite

that huge YouTube link dump copied-and-pasted from somewhere else got, what, 300 favorites? 500?
posted by matteo at 2:47 PM on March 3, 2007

moratorium consensus smock pike vibrate drama queen mushroom mushroom
posted by sciurus at 2:51 PM on March 3, 2007

Well, what I would like to do is hijack this thread to the topic of calling any woman a cunt, or write things like Her vestigial testicles evidently block the entrance to her tiny misshapen vagina... [her] anus is actually located in her mouth cavity. I happen to think that calling anyone a cunt should be beyond the pale and that calling a woman a cunt is the same as calling a black man a nigger.

The same goes for the tiny misshapen vagina sort of spewage. It just makes me sick to read that sort of thing. Would you riff so in front of women members you'd just met at a meetup this way ? This is the permanent impression you make upon other people's memories that we're talking about here. Try to visualize what people are going to always think of you for your saying something like that before you hit post.

The irony of using hate speech to describe a hate speaker aside, when are people going to get that what you write online is written in stone ? This is a community in which we are interdependent to certain degree. There are bounds for what you can get away with saying. Talk ugly here--people here will never forget.

And as for potential employers Googling up your name, well, need I draw a picture ? Think before you go postal.
posted by y2karl at 2:53 PM on March 3, 2007

Agreed times a million, karl.

When will people get that this is the real world? How many people have ruined their own professional lives or reputations without even knowing it?
posted by roll truck roll at 3:01 PM on March 3, 2007

Metafilter: An lot of MetaFilter is drivel.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 3:03 PM on March 3, 2007

matteo writes "that huge YouTube link dump copied-and-pasted from somewhere else got, what, 300 favorites? 500?"

Was it a good huge copy-paste YouTube link dump? If so, then, yeah, good stuff gets favorited a lot. Was it a bad huge YouTube link dump copied from somewhere else? Then, yeah, there are occasional exceptions. Is there a pattern of things getting favorited a lot when they aren't good? Then using favorites to determine link quality isn't good. Looks like we need more data.
posted by Bugbread at 3:27 PM on March 3, 2007

Some people come to the record store solely to find that old Django Reinhard '78.

Many more come to buy Ashlee Simpson's new CD.
posted by psmealey at 3:58 PM on March 3, 2007

Another question worth considering is how the reputation of certain users impacts the number of favorites their posts get.

Of course, I don't think being a well-known or well-liked user automatically inspires more favorites, but I wonder if it skewes the averages.
posted by serazin at 4:04 PM on March 3, 2007

Warnock's Dilemma.
posted by longtime_lurker at 8:50 PM on March 3, 2007

One thing it's taught me is that the amount of commentary that occurs on any site is not a real indicator of how much the post is valued. If you've posted something on Mefi and been dissapointed with the response I suggest you do some searching via Google, Technorati or others and see what response it's had beyond the site. You might be surprised to find it's taken on a life of it's own.
posted by dodgygeezer at 3:07 PM PST on April 24 [+] [!]

What he said.
posted by y2karl at 9:38 PM on March 3, 2007

eustacescrubb's great find: 7 users marked as a favorite
yet another FPP about Ann Coulter: 1 user marked as a favorite
posted by mathowie at 3:41 PM EST on March 3

My! What are these? Laurels? They look so comfy! Mayhaps I shall rest a spell on them.
posted by eustacescrubb at 9:50 PM on March 3, 2007

Is it fair to consider the number of comments an FPP receives as an indication of community interest in the post?

No, and it's not accurate either. The Coulter post was crap and I'm surprised it even stuck around, but I have no idea what you're trying to get at with this MeTa post except maybe some more eyeballs for eustacescrubb's post.
posted by jessamyn at 10:08 PM on March 3, 2007

I have no idea what you're trying to get at with this MeTa post

Hey. I've taken over the spot for Worse Than Ann Coulter... because I'm the one who joked she had a tiny misshapen vagina and an anus in her mouth (you had to be there).

Evidentially we need to worry that y2karl will narc on us to our bosses if he don't like what we say.

Oh. Wait. I'M my boss.

"Me!"
"Yes?"
"YOUR FIRED!"

Anyway jessamyn. Just link to my "More Evil Than Coulter" comments from here on out to generate some real numbers. I promise MetaFilter will make the NBC news in no time!
posted by tkchrist at 1:08 AM on March 4, 2007

The same goes for the tiny misshapen vagina sort of spewage. It just makes me sick to read that sort of thing.

y2karl you HAVE hijacked this thread.

The word "vagina" makes you sick? Or the descriptor "tiny and misshapen." You are seriously out of your mind here.

This is YOUR frigg'n hang-up. You don't like free speech? Tough.

Vagina. vagina. vagina. Anus. Anus. Anus.

There. Look your still alive!

Attacking Coulter on an intellectual level is fruitless. There is nothing of the intellect there! We know her ideas have no merit. So we vent at her with personal insults as a way to release our frustrations at her ilk.

Anyway. NOTHING I said was "hate" speech. NOTHING.
Except for hate of one individual. Who HAPPENS to be a woman. So any hate I have for this individual applies to an entire class. Well. Fuck you. It's all in your mind.

Let's see it again:

She is angry. Angry because she can't get laid.
No. I mean she CAN'T get laid. It's a tragic birth defect.
Her vestigial testicles evidently block the entrance to her tiny misshapen vagina. I know what you're thinking. You're thinking "Hey. There is always Anal."
Alas it's not an option. Coulter's anus is actually located in her mouth cavity. And with the shit that spews out of THAT ugly orifice? Nobody wants to fuck that mouth.

You know what I'm saying here is that what she says is so ugly there is no mean sufficiently metaphorically clean enough for her to engage in sex. I suppose I could have said that. But it's not as funny or insulting.

There is nothing there I wouldn't also say about a man who I find vile.

My comment was not as bad as Blaisongs I fucked Ann Coulter in the Ass blog link which was kind of a rape fantasy in my opninion.

Your point is that women are to be such a weak protected class in your opinion that they are no longer in line for in-kind insults? Even when they deserve it? Who is sexist now?

For the record I didn't call her a cunt. Not till later just to get your goat. And I called her a dick.

But in your world it's ok to call ME "squared and cubed" worse than a bigot, a homophobe, a racist and a fascist. Inputing my character to such a degree? THAT is not "hate" speech? Labeling somebody a bigot and fascist?
posted by tkchrist at 2:20 AM on March 4, 2007

Perhaps unsurprisingly, this thread (fer chrissakes!) is turning into an Ann Coulter thread. That's just fuckin' great.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 2:27 AM on March 4, 2007

micayetoca writes: So, do the comments reflect something or nothing at all in Metafilter Music?

Well, I'd say the comments in MeFi Music reflect very well indeed on that tiny (way too tiny!) percentage of MeFiers who do visit and take the time to listen to the offerings there. I think what I'm feeling from your comment, though, is a basic frustration that there are indeed so few comments made... I'd certainly like to see more comments there myself, and I'd like to go on record as saying visitors to MeFi Music should be UNAFRAID TO MAKE NEGATIVE CRITICISMS, as long as they aren't just mean-spirited. Of course it's great to get positive feedback from people (lord knows us strugglin' artistes need some strokes now and again), but I think it could be interesting and informative for the posters and listeners alike if commenters really felt they could, well, critique the music there a little more... um... critically! I think there's room for that at MeFi Music, and I think MeFiers might go there with more frequency if they felt that the comments and back-and-forth were maybe a little more like what they get in the blue. Of course I know it'll never be just like the blue, and I wouldn't want or expect it to, but, maybe there's room for a little more rough-and-tumble, somehow, at MeFi Music?

Either that, or, I dunno, every 100th commenter gets a free Django Reinhardt 78? The new Ashlee Simpson?
posted by flapjax at midnite at 2:51 AM on March 4, 2007

Jessamyn writes The Coulter post was crap and I'm surprised it even stuck around, but I have no idea what you're trying to get at with this MeTa post except maybe some more eyeballs for eustacescrubb's post.

Did number two really write that? Wow. How bitchy of you. My post was OK. I was striving for "OK" when I made it. Included some "non-mefi" Republican views, etc. Sorry that bothered you.

I've had maybe two "moment of clarity" of FPPs where I thought I was improving the tubes, but the rest are just what they are. Member-created content. Five-buck memberships. People telling me to eat cock-bags, etc.

Thanks for being impartial and all. Your normative ideal of "the best FPP EVAR" would sincerely be appreciated. Just so we know how to please you.
posted by bardic at 5:52 AM on March 4, 2007

bardic : "I was striving for 'OK' when I made it."

Aim high, man, aim high.
posted by Bugbread at 6:41 AM on March 4, 2007

WTF is your problem languagehat?

My problem is that this is a crappy MeTa post. It's a blatant rehash of an issue we've hashed out a million times without result, an issue that apparently eclipses peace in the Middle East in importance: what's up with some good posts not getting a lot of comments (and in the Web 2.0 version, favorites), while some bad posts get lots of comments? What's up with that, huh? As has been said millions of times already, yeah, some good posts don't get a lot of comments, while some bad posts get lots of comments. Huh! How 'bout that! I guess comments (and/or favorites) aren't an ideal indicator of post quality! Say, let's have another MetaTalk post about it so we can go through it all again for the slow readers.

My other problem is that you coupled this pointless rehash with a gratuitious slam at bardic's post, misunderstanding the whole point of it.

Of course, #2 doesn't seem to get it either:

The Coulter post was crap and I'm surprised it even stuck around

So let me get this straight: any post that even mentions Ann Coulter is crap? If Ann Coulter discovered a cure for cancer or (in my previous fantasy suggestion) shot Hillary Clinton, we shouldn't talk about it because OMG Coulter WTF? Bardic's post was not about Ann Coulter as such, it was about the Republican Party's relationship with a venom-spewing extremist; the proof that it's an important story is that the front pages of the newspapers today have stories about how the candidates are dealing with it.

There's too damn much knee-jerking around here.
posted by languagehat at 6:58 AM on March 4, 2007 [1 favorite]

You're right bugbread. But I can't be blamed for learning oh so much from your sterling contributions.

Point being, wtf? There are awesome posts here that happen maybe once a fortnight. I'd like to think I've had one, maybe two. Until then, I can only worship at the fount of your gregarious wisdom.

Larger point being, this is a cool place. Until any of us are capable of making every single one of our FPP's smell like patchoul oil and tasting like honey, you're being a dick. Yet again. But I still love you.
posted by bardic at 7:01 AM on March 4, 2007

I think what I'm feeling from your comment, though, is a basic frustration that there are indeed so few comments made... I'd certainly like to see more comments there myself, and I'd like to go on record as saying visitors to MeFi Music should be UNAFRAID TO MAKE NEGATIVE CRITICISMS, as long as they aren't just mean-spirited.

posted by flapjax at midnite

Yeah, that's exactly it, and also that I always try to direct attention to Metafilter Music when I can. You know, it took me like two months to realized it was there after it opened and I think many people may be in that situation, that's why I keep bringing it up.

And just so that non-musicians know, it is great to know heat you think. It is fantastic to be able to receive feedback from great musicians like the ones that hang around there, but Metafilter Music could also be a really good way for us to hear the opinion of people who don't do music. People for whom a song is just sad, or cheerful, or makes them think of the train that used to go by the house where they grew up.

Or if that strange trumpet that any musician would know is off-key sounds great for a non-musician. So yeah, long story short, I just wanted to say, if you haven't checked it out, I'm sure you'll be amazed at what you'll find. And every single comment is greatly appreciated.
posted by micayetoca at 7:04 AM on March 4, 2007

Me and languagehat are agreeing on something. Which means, yet again, I love this place. Fairly- to Really- smart people from all over the world congregate here. That shouldn't be taken for granted.

I shall probably call him a douche in the near future, and he shall call me a worthless twat. But it's still pure win IMO.

But this thread is shite if jonmc doesn't show up so I can tell him he's a middle-aged phony. Speaking, myself, as a middle-aged phony.
posted by bardic at 7:24 AM on March 4, 2007

If I make an FPP and get 5 comments, I am not encouraged to make one which is similar. The more subtle problem is how do I know a post is great BEFORE I enter into it. Perhaps the possibility to rank a post "hot or not" that would show in the blue?

These days if you get only five comments it's a pretty safe bet that not that many people found it and liked it. You can't go just by the numbers, you have to look at what was said. If five people said great post, then I thnk you have succeeded in making one. It doesn't have to please everybody to be good. That is why so many people like this place.

Mefi is eclectic to the extreme. I wasn't fascinated by eustacescrubb's post, but others were. It's a fine post. Going to a voting system might very well wreck that, like top 40 radio wrecks music. It encourages people to go for the hit which pleases the most people not the hit that pleases some people the most.

The other issue is getting people to actually click through. There are so many posts some days that it can be overwhelming, especially when you have little time for internet diversions. Link aggregators like MeFi are great for making the best use of that time. In the span of a coffee break you can find something interesting to divert you from your drudgery. However, with all the posts being made many are still picking through them. I might click through to two or three on many days. You have to sell your post, like a newspaper headline. If you try something cutesy that fails to reveal what's inside many people just skip right over it. Even when you describe it well it helps to put something showing just how interesting it is into the post.
posted by caddis at 7:49 AM on March 4, 2007

um, hello people? there is a fish. in my pants.
posted by quonsar at 7:52 AM on March 4, 2007

I recommend against baited hooks.
posted by caddis at 7:55 AM on March 4, 2007

Britney Spears is a pop music sensation, and an American icon. However, there are critics who don't seem to get the appeal. Why is it that you hate America, anyways? Why does Baby Jesus look at you and find you wanting? What's so wrong with a shaven vajajay?

NSFW. Like it matters.
posted by bardic at 8:10 AM on March 4, 2007 [1 favorite]

Me and languagehat are agreeing on something.

Actually, we agree on lots of stuff. But you tend to notice it more when we're calling each other douches and twats, which is understandable. Ya worthless twat.
posted by languagehat at 9:07 AM on March 4, 2007

The Coulter post was crap and I'm surprised it even stuck around

So let me get this straight: any post that even mentions Ann Coulter is crap?[...]

There's too damn much knee-jerking around here.


You know, irony can be pretty ironic sometimes.
posted by tkolar at 9:13 AM on March 4, 2007

On the other hand, I would like to welcome everyone back to sanity. Last month's MetaTalk lovefest was really getting on my nerves.

Pointless bickering! That's what it's all about, people!
posted by tkolar at 9:15 AM on March 4, 2007

Pointless bickering! That's what it's all about, people!

No it isn't.
posted by eustacescrubb at 9:46 AM on March 4, 2007 [1 favorite]

bardic writes "Point being, wtf? "

Point being, aim for better than "OK". I did. Maybe I failed, but if you aim for "Great", you're going to achieve either "Great", "Good", "OK", "Bad", or "Terrible". If you aim for "OK", you're going to achieve either "OK", "Bad", or "Terrible". So, yeah, my posts may not have been sterling, but they had the potential to be so. If you aim for "OK", yours won't. And this is MetaFilter. The whole point is to filter the good from the bad.

bardic writes "Until any of us are capable of making every single one of our FPP's smell like patchoul oil and tasting like honey, you're being a dick."

And you're trying to weaken the "Filter" part of "MetaFilter" by intentionally posting stuff that even you, the poster, think is only "OK". Or, as they call it in the old country, "being a dick".
posted by Bugbread at 5:34 PM on March 4, 2007

"The Coulter post was crap and I'm surprised it even stuck around,"

Yeah, cortex really dropped the ball on that one.
posted by klangklangston at 4:15 AM on March 5, 2007

tkchrist is apparently a sock puppet for insanity prawn boy.
posted by flabdablet at 4:31 AM on March 5, 2007

Heh. Do not tempt me, klang.
posted by cortex at 6:23 AM on March 5, 2007