I'm sure people would like to delete him in real life. September 24, 2007 6:37 AM   Subscribe

This thread should not have been deleted.

The thread was deleted with an explanation that it is too similar to this one. While the newer thread seems to be on-topic for Ahmadinejad speaking at Columbia today, the older thread is mostly about Dilbert, Zionism, and the word "fuck."

Someone's going to see that there's no thread about Ahmadinejad's visit to Columbia (which there isn't, really), and post another one. The remaining thread is mostly about Scott Adams.
posted by oaf to Etiquette/Policy at 6:37 AM (61 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

instead of bombing Iran, we should bomb those who keep posting about Ahmadinejad speaking at Columbia like it's the end of the world
posted by matteo at 6:42 AM on September 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


While the newer thread seems to be on-topic for Ahmadinejad speaking at Columbia today, the older thread is mostly about Dilbert, Zionism, and the word "fuck."

Agreed. That's a weak deletion- both FPPs involve Ahmadinejad but only one is actually taking about him, and that's the one that just got axed.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 6:43 AM on September 24, 2007


I'm sort of amazed that the first post -- which quotes "jew hater" when the comment doesn't even say that -- stayed at all, but there is an updatefilter aspect to the second post. There would have been -- maybe can be -- a better post about the Columbia visit, but that one isn't it.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:44 AM on September 24, 2007


How can the moderator be amazed that a post stayed?
posted by smackfu at 6:48 AM on September 24, 2007 [3 favorites]


Respecting Students and Academic Freedom Lee Bollinger, the President of Columbia University, has defended the decision to invite President Ahmadinejad on the grounds that only through actually hearing and challenging President Ahmadinejad’s ideas, can one fully comprehend the odious and ignorant nature of his views.

Fear not, for Mr. Bollinger has promised to be *very very tough* with Mr. Ahmadinejad. Can't wait to see it. "If you keep this 'wipe Israel off the map' crap we will invite you LECTURES and talk to you using VERY HARSH WORDS". That should do the trick.
(emphasis added)

Editorializing is usually frowned upon. Not everyone who reads Metafilter agrees with the NY Post. The post is just poorly-worded flame-bait, and doesn't begin to cover the topic very well. Good deletion.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 6:51 AM on September 24, 2007


How can the moderator be amazed that a post stayed?

Because I was on vacation? And on a lot of hot button political posts, I'll usually get a second opinion before I do anything anyhow. And orthogonality frequently accuses me of having some particular axe to grind with his posts so I leave most moderation of his stuff up to others.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:55 AM on September 24, 2007


oaf: "Someone's going to see that there's no thread about Ahmadinejad's visit to Columbia (which there isn't, really), and post another one."

"This news item hasn't been posted already" doesn't a good post make.
posted by Plutor at 6:57 AM on September 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


As you know, you get to discuss the thread you have, not the thread you might want or wish to have at a later time.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 7:00 AM on September 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


Good deletion, bad deletion reasoning -- I have to agree that, as I scanned the front page, a post that seems to be largely about Dilbert (!) is not where I would look for info and etc. on Ahmadinejad's visit to Columbia. On the other hand, the editorializing in the deleted post really does suck kind of a lot. So I guess we can expect a new and improved Ahmadinejad at Columbia thread in three...two...
posted by kittens for breakfast at 7:01 AM on September 24, 2007


Somehow, it failed to clear the bar set by linking to an episode of Batman.
posted by Wolfdog at 7:03 AM on September 24, 2007


Somehow, it failed to clear the bar set by linking to an episode of Batman.

Dude, few things DO.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 7:06 AM on September 24, 2007 [2 favorites]


It was worth deleting for the sarcastic editorializing alone. That kind of patronizing crap should never stay on the front page.
posted by mediareport at 7:08 AM on September 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


Same metatime, same metachannel...
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 7:09 AM on September 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


I generally oppose deleting political posts (if the reason is their being about politics), but that was pretty thin gruel.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 7:25 AM on September 24, 2007


It was worth deleting for the sarcastic editorializing alone.

Agreed, but the subject matter is entirely different. No one is really talking about the Iranian loony, his talk at Columbia or any of the related free speech issues. It's all about whether Scott Adams is just as loony, brilliant, hateful, corporate, whatever.
posted by caddis at 7:29 AM on September 24, 2007


Because I was on vacation?

How can a moderator have a life, what the hell?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:40 AM on September 24, 2007


I feel like this is coming down to my not having been explicitly mean enough about the original post. So, look:

It was a bad post. A link to a brief op-ed? Seriously? No good. Unless you're arguing that it was a good post, rather than merely a post on a topic you think was good, I'm not sure what else to say about it.

I linked to the Adams thread because, however the thread has developed, they are sure as shit both on the same general topic. It's not a Iran/Columbia thread specifically, sure, but it's the right neighborhood and the deleted post was really not worth the 12-hours-later Ahmadinejad update.

Demanding fine-grained coverage of specific current topic A and damn the post quality! seems really off the mark, and it's hard to read a defense of the deleted post as anything else on account of it being exactly the sort of super-lame "here's a short editorial, discuss!" post that's been deleted tons of times previously.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:40 AM on September 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


Ah, mad in e jaded sort of way. What can you expect, really, from Dilbert thread deniers?
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 7:40 AM on September 24, 2007


Weak post. Weaker deletion.
posted by oh pollo! at 7:53 AM on September 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


however the thread has developed, they are sure as shit both on the same general topic

by that logic, these posts are all about the same general topic, photography.
Photographer Kim Keever takes incredible, otherwordly nature shots using a unique technique: she builds the subject by hand in a 100 gallon fishtank. Other galleries of her work here & here. Via, which was via.
posted by jonson at 10:11 AM - 15 comments (15 new) +

Ffffound is kind of like del.icio.us for images.
posted by gwint at 9:02 AM - 6 comments (6 new) +

Nicolas Chorier takes stunning photos of a wide range of subjects and themes using Kite Aerial Photography. Be sure to click on the India link on the editions button as well as Uzbekistan. Another Frenchman, Arthur Batut (click "Le cerf-volant) took the first Kite Aerial Photograph in 1888. Here are some resources should you wish to try this out.
posted by adamvasco at 7:53 AM - 3 comments (3 new) +
posted by caddis at 8:06 AM on September 24, 2007


I don't really think "photography" and "the political reactions to proposed US-side face time with Iranian President Ahmadinejad" are of comparable specificity. I'm also not sure why pointing to a related (however you prefer to qualify the word in one direction or the other) thread when deleting a just-plain-bad post is generating so much of a reaction.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:13 AM on September 24, 2007


It's Monday. Mondays should be wiped off the face of the earth.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 8:19 AM on September 24, 2007


Hey! Wipe that grin off your face!
posted by Krrrlson at 8:21 AM on September 24, 2007


It's Monday. Mondays should be wiped off the face of the earth.

No doubt. What a clusterfuck my day is turning out to be. I mean, while we're wasting bandwidth like this, can I just say: Where in the fucking fuck is my thumb drive. Goddammit. GodDAMNit! Agggggggghfuck! Seriously, if anybody's come across it, send it back, all right? Don't be a douchebag. I'll buy you a better one. JUST SEND IT BACK.

Thanks.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 8:23 AM on September 24, 2007


Where in the fucking fuck is my thumb drive.

Do you have a cat? Did you look under the sofa?
posted by desjardins at 8:31 AM on September 24, 2007


by that logic, these posts are all about the same general topic, photography.

By that narrow minded "logic", we'd have one really long post, since hey, these are all posts, right?

So yeah, it's possible to twist a moderator's statements into just about anything (except pretzels, dammit), but it usually isn't helpful.

And I wish cortex had writtent that the original post was deleted for the editorailizing. This thread probably would have been avoided.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:36 AM on September 24, 2007


She had her cat for breakfast.
posted by kuujjuarapik at 8:36 AM on September 24, 2007


Do you have a cat? Did you look under the sofa?

The cat's what worries me the most. If somehow the thumb drive fell from its usual resting place (my computer desk) and onto the floor, from there it wouldn't be much of a stretch to imagine it in her clutches. She might have hidden it anywhere! My hope is that I was just too out of it this morning to see it, and it's like, right there.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 8:41 AM on September 24, 2007


Dude, it's right over there, can't you see it?
posted by edgeways at 9:10 AM on September 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


Editorializing is usually frowned upon. Not everyone who reads Metafilter agrees with the NY Post. The post is just poorly-worded flame-bait, and doesn't begin to cover the topic very well. Good deletion.

Seconded. I'd like to see a good Ahmadinejad post—he's one of the more interesting political figures around, and the whole WTF-WTC contretemps is a fascinating exercise in outrage hypocrisy—but this wasn't it.
posted by languagehat at 9:14 AM on September 24, 2007


Would anyone else care for some cheesecake? It's fresh!
posted by blue_beetle at 9:41 AM on September 24, 2007


1) Thread #1: about one person's take on Amadiniejad at columbia.

2) Thread #2: Amadiniejad at Columbia, plus some bullshit editorializing.

I don't see a reason to keep the second one, especially since the editorializing would kill any useful discussion. Of you want to talk about Amadiniejad at, or not at, Columbia, then do it in the first thread.
posted by delmoi at 9:53 AM on September 24, 2007


caddis: "by that logic, these posts are all about the same general topic, photography."

I agree entirely. All of the posts in the blue are always about the same goddamn topic: stuff. I'm getting sick and tired of this repetition. I hope that sooner or later, the mods come to their senses and start culling the majority of these inane stuff posts.
posted by Plutor at 9:54 AM on September 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


Editorializing is usually frowned upon. Not everyone who reads Metafilter agrees with the NY Post. The post is just poorly-worded flame-bait, and doesn't begin to cover the topic very well. Good deletion.

I agree. So this should be next right?
posted by loquax at 10:02 AM on September 24, 2007


It's sad that people are arguing threads should be restored because the deletion wasn't good enough, with no thought spared to the actual content of the post and if it's any good at all.

Unless oaf is arguing that GYOBFW + Op-Ed post = FPP goodness, that is. And I sure as hell hope he doesn't.

Someone's going to see that there's no thread about Ahmadinejad's visit to Columbia (which there isn't, really), and post another one.

Then good for them. If it's a good post it will stay on the front page. Really, is "there's no good post up on this topic" mean that we must allow a crappy one? Geez.
posted by splice at 10:05 AM on September 24, 2007


The deletion reason, that is.
posted by splice at 10:06 AM on September 24, 2007


I agree. So this should be next right?

Why say that loquax? It isn't editorialized. It comes with a dramatization but other than that it's simply facts.
posted by srboisvert at 10:09 AM on September 24, 2007


really bad deletion
posted by petsounds at 10:09 AM on September 24, 2007


It's sad that people are arguing threads should be restored because the deletion wasn't good enough,

for the record, although I think the deletion reason did not make sense, I think the deletion was appropriate. I also think this whole thread is pointless and should be closed.
posted by caddis at 10:11 AM on September 24, 2007


I would like to see a good Ahmadinejad-Columbia post too. This one merited deletion for the editorializing, but not the topic per se.
posted by madamjujujive at 10:13 AM on September 24, 2007


Why say that loquax? It isn't editorialized. It comes with a dramatization but other than that it's simply facts.

Military baiting, killing Iraqis

The article linked refers to specific charges, against specific people, in a specific unit. It states that how many people were killed in this manner is unknown, as well as how widespread (if at all) the practice is. To state as "fact" that the "military is baiting, killing Iraqis" is disingenuous, inaccurate, inflammatory and editorializing. Especially when the "military" is bringing these people up on charges for violating the rules.

"Hey look at this shiny trinket, I think I'll pick it up and see what it---OH GOD MY FACE."


Inflammatory, and editorializing. Calling it a dramatization instead doesn't help much.

I say neither should be deleted (and that very little should be deleted in general), but don't call out "editorializing" on a case by case basis. Either they all go or all stay.
posted by loquax at 10:29 AM on September 24, 2007


Hey Ahmadinejad is going to Columbia? Fucker, I couldn't get in there.
posted by Mister_A at 10:48 AM on September 24, 2007


...it wouldn't be much of a stretch to imagine it in her clutches.

Check the litter box.
posted by ericb at 10:49 AM on September 24, 2007


I also think this whole thread is pointless and should be closed.

Yeah, all MeTa threads are on the same topic: "You suck." "No, you suck."
posted by oaf at 10:54 AM on September 24, 2007


Well, maybe you should have applied yourself.
And in the interview said Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth, I know that's where I screw up in most applicant Q & As.

It's Monday. Mondays should be wiped off the face of the earth.


Dude, we're talking about Dilbert, not Garfield.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:55 AM on September 24, 2007


Whoops, the first part was a response to Mister A.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:55 AM on September 24, 2007


Sincere question: Does the propagation of "Israel wiped from the face of the earth" mean Juan Cole was wrong, or are we just havin' some fun?
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 11:00 AM on September 24, 2007


“If somehow the thumb drive fell from its usual resting place (my computer desk) and onto the floor...”

Lucky you. My cat routinely finds things sitting on the edge of my desk and knocks them off and onto the floor just for the hell of it. Yet I still step on things and wonder "how'd this get on the floor?"

Who knows where the kitchen sink scrub will turn up next.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 11:05 AM on September 24, 2007


As they say in Gaelic, "Go n-ithe an cat thú is go n-ithe an diabhal an cat", or " May the cat eat you and the devil eat the cat."

If I could only figure out thumb drive in Gaelic.
posted by SteveInMaine at 11:11 AM on September 24, 2007


Where in the fucking fuck is my thumb drive.

Where did you put your butt drive?
posted by jamjam at 11:29 AM on September 24, 2007


Check the litter box.

Sweet baby Jesus.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 12:18 PM on September 24, 2007


Lucky you. My cat routinely finds things sitting on the edge of my desk and knocks them off and onto the floor just for the hell of it. Yet I still step on things and wonder "how'd this get on the floor?"

I used to have a cat who would hide my glasses. I love that cat, and she's lucky, because any other creature -- human or animal -- would likely have gone out the window over this. (The cat now lives with my elderly mother, but seems to realize that hiding her glasses would just be cruel.) My current cat also engages in the more normal cat behavior of knocking shit down randomly, but for maximum effect she waits until (a) there's something very heavy to knock down, and (b) I am sound asleep.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 12:23 PM on September 24, 2007


I used to have a cat who would hide my glasses.

Ditto ... and watches, trinkets, etc. And 'the knock something over to wake me up' happens most every morning. This morning she climbed into a book case and flung a book from the height of four shelves onto the wooden floor. "Time for my morning Fancy Feast!"
posted by ericb at 12:30 PM on September 24, 2007


don't call out "editorializing" on a case by case basis

I admit I spend a lot of time on Metafilter. Probably too much time for my own good, and probably a lot more than everyone else would like. But even I can't stand watch over the site 24/7. If you don't like a post, just do what I do: Flag it.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:41 PM on September 24, 2007


In a case like this, wouldn't it be neat if the deleted thread could stay up in a closed state and/or somehow redirect people to the other one? I don't look at the Scott Adams thread and think 'hey - that's where people are discussing Ahmedinejad @ Columbia."

If you read MeFi thoroughly and carefully, as the admins do, it's easy to know where people are discussing what issues at any single moment. "Hey - there's another conversation about this somewhere else," sure, but oaf has a point too that it's not always easy to make those connections.
posted by scarabic at 3:09 PM on September 24, 2007


It's an interesting idea, scarabic. For what it's worth, I sometimes (though not religiously) make a link in the standing thread to a deleted double—usually when the double has some pretty good extra content—but that doesn't really address the root idea of visibility.

I like the basic idea of finding unobtrusive ways to aid topic-tracking, but at the same time I don't think mefi has ever really had that sort of "if it's being discussed, you'll know where" sensibility. Closing mefi threads but leaving them visible like normal posts would be kind of an unusual change to make, though I know variations on that theme have been proposed now and then.
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:17 PM on September 24, 2007


Man. It was on my computer desk the whole time! God, I feel stupid. At some point during the weekend, I (or a guest!) evidently buried it under old magazines and crap. I'm guessing it was a guest, since I know, heh, that I would never be so shortsighted as to dump stuff on top of a very small object that I would totally need to locate for work Monday morning. Preposterous! Anyway, crisis averted. Whew!
posted by kittens for breakfast at 3:47 PM on September 24, 2007


Wolfdog: "Somehow, it failed to clear the bar set by linking to an episode of Batman."

Are you still bleating on about that? Christ. Dude, let it go.
posted by Second Account For Making Jokey Comments at 4:14 PM on September 24, 2007


Anyway, crisis averted. Whew!

I love a happy ending.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:00 PM on September 24, 2007


I love a happy ending.

Seriously. I think we oughtta just close the thread now. I mean, it's all anticlimax from here.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 8:05 PM on September 24, 2007


This thread should not have been deleted.

I feel quite strongly that not enough threads get deleted, probably by a factor of about 5.
So if your thread gets deleted, rest assured, it should have.
posted by signal at 10:13 AM on September 25, 2007


« Older Better Google searching for MeFi?   |   LOLTAGS are not useful Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments