My recent post was deleted and I'm going to bitch about it.

Deleted: It's obvious from the comments that almost no one read the linked sites. It's obvious that the mod that deleted my post didn't either. I didn't express an opinion within the post, but tried to objectively cite various viewpoints and facts. It was essentially a response to what is currently being reported on the major news outlets, pointing to several sites in connection to what is being reported in those broadcasts. I honestly have no opinion as to the cause of the fires, nor do I have any opinion regarding 'eco-terrorism', nor even on what George Carlin said. These ideas are being discussed on all news outlets.

Jessamyn,your reason for deleting the post is ridiculous. Because I don't have supporting 'facts'? I wasn't blogging, making a point or grinding an ax. This is what is being discussed and these are the sites that I pointed to that will illuminate the discussion. You know, 'all things considered'.

posted by sluglicker to etiquette/policy at 8:32 PM (68 comments total)

Concise title, I'll give you that much.
posted by CitrusFreak12 at 8:39 PM on October 25, 2007

None of the links were actually particularly good. I checked them all. It was not clear at all from the post whether you were presenting this as an actual statement about eco-terrorism or a commentary on the existence of opinions about eco-terrorism or what, but it was kind of a mess in general.

On top of that, exactly what Jess said about it being kind of soon to just stir the pot on all this—you couldn't give it a week or two to avoid pressing people's buttons? It seemed pretty ill-considered, regardless of your intent.
posted by cortex at 8:42 PM on October 25, 2007

This is what is being discussed and these are the sites that I pointed to that will illuminate the discussion.

If it's already being discussed somewhere else, why don't you go there and discuss it? We don't have to discuss everything in the world that's on the web, and we prefer to discuss just the best of it.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 8:42 PM on October 25, 2007 [1 favorite]

Deletion reasons:

1. This is a hand-waving OMGFilter post about something that has affected a lot of people in pretty bad ways
2. Its a little early to bring out the conspiracy angles
3. This particular post is light on facts and heavy on the verbage.
3. It might be better on your own blog or a group blog that appreciates a good raised eyebrow approach to current events.
4. What cortex said.

So I guess it was a little more than just "supporting 'facts.'"

Just sayin'.
posted by CitrusFreak12 at 8:45 PM on October 25, 2007

I didn't express an opinion within the post, but tried to objectively cite various viewpoints and facts.

"Eco-Terrorists might be responsible for these fires and if they are, who will defend industry from these eco-freaks?"

You then link to a few websites which say that the original "ELF" has never abandoned certain criminal acts. Then you post a snippet from an article saying that some dude got shot running away from the cops. We're supposed to combine all this and come to the conclusion that a bunch of tree-hugging hippies decided to set a few thousand acres of trees on fire?

Frankly, I've gotten my ass handed to me here on MeFi for less than this. You got off easy.
posted by Avenger at 8:47 PM on October 25, 2007 [3 favorites]

Words are not important, but the way we use them is.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:50 PM on October 25, 2007

Eco-Terrorists might be responsible for these fires and if they are, who will defend industry from these eco-freaks?

This is not the best of the web; this is the same tired, uninformed rhetoric from ~~Holocaust deniers~~ ~~energy industry PR lackeys~~ Michael Crichton fans:

But now every time nature acts up and does what it traditionally has done, we say it must have some human cause such as global warming. Worse, in the name of preventing doomsday from human inventions, we are dismantling some of the very protections our grandparents created to shelter us from nature's wrath. If we keep blindly following environmentalists, nature could give us its own doomsday.

Not exactly original or important thought. While your setup is provocative, it isn't framed in a particularly intelligent or cohesive way, either.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 8:52 PM on October 25, 2007

It's obvious from the comments that almost no one read the linked sites. It's obvious that the mod that deleted my post didn't either.

Might wanna work on your approach.
posted by mkultra at 8:53 PM on October 25, 2007

Well, the only thing I can say is that I thought it was a freakin' incredible post, and as I read the comments I sat here thinking, "Nobody gets it. Nobody has a clue." See how superior I am to all of you?
posted by sluglicker at 8:54 PM on October 25, 2007

Ok, now you're just being silly.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 8:54 PM on October 25, 2007 [1 favorite]

Silly is good.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:56 PM on October 25, 2007

"Nobody gets it. Nobody has a clue."

Working towards a Ph.D. in reverse psychology, are ye?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 8:57 PM on October 25, 2007 [2 favorites]

I'm just glad that fandango_matt's FREE MUMIA comment now has more opportunities for favorites.
posted by yhbc at 8:59 PM on October 25, 2007

well, TREE mumia, but you knew that
posted by yhbc at 9:00 PM on October 25, 2007

Metafilter: Nobody gets it. Nobody has a clue.
posted by ottereroticist at 9:01 PM on October 25, 2007

In lieu of posting to Metatalk, I think you should have to do a shot if your FPP gets deleted.

If you still feel like you should post, do another shot.

Continue until your problem is solved.
posted by pokermonk at 9:01 PM on October 25, 2007 [3 favorites]

I started out with a PhD in reverse psychology.
posted by kosem at 9:05 PM on October 25, 2007 [7 favorites]

sluglicker is Glenn Beck? Neat.
posted by homunculus at 9:07 PM on October 25, 2007

I think this was an excellent deletion. Thank you, Jess.
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 9:08 PM on October 25, 2007

I oppose any "you deleted my post" MeTa where the post in question includes crap spelling.
posted by pompomtom at 9:12 PM on October 25, 2007

Remember that scene in Star 80, where the boyfriend kept introducing himself to his reflection in the mirror? Yeah.
posted by maxwelton at 9:17 PM on October 25, 2007 [2 favorites]

See how superior I am to all of you?

All things considered, you're acting like a douchebag.
posted by dhammond at 9:18 PM on October 25, 2007

It was a crap post, but the comments were starting to get funny.

Sadly, we may never know if the women with flags painted on their naked bodies were hot or not.
posted by b1tr0t at 9:19 PM on October 25, 2007

Sadly, we may never know if the women with flags painted on their naked bodies were hot or not.

Huh.

*checks deletion log*

Eh.
posted by cortex at 9:21 PM on October 25, 2007 [1 favorite]

I think it's an aquired taste, the naked girl in flag paint thing, but you can see it here.
posted by jessamyn at 9:25 PM on October 25, 2007 [1 favorite]

yikes. delete away.

That is no 1999 Swimsuit Issue.
posted by b1tr0t at 9:29 PM on October 25, 2007

AND I'M PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN
WITH A STAR ON MY BOOOOBIE
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 9:40 PM on October 25, 2007 [1 favorite]

HI I'M ON METAFILTER AND I DON'T GET IT. I DON'T HAVE A CLUE.
posted by googly at 9:41 PM on October 25, 2007

Acquired taste, my ass. America we stand as one.
posted by dhammond at 9:58 PM on October 25, 2007

When he got to the door, there was a hook hanging on the handle!
posted by kirkaracha at 10:00 PM on October 25, 2007

What does this button do?
posted by carsonb at 10:14 PM on October 25, 2007

almost no one read the linked sites

Link One: A year and a half old alarmist article about eco-terrorism that ends by directly linking it to environmentalism, which, "If we value our lives, we must never make common cause with...". No mention of California fires.

Link Two: Six month old interview with some dude with a shit-eating grin who blames environmentalists - dubbed Eco-Freaks - for the Katrina disaster. And uses the lyrics of "I Won't Dance" as proof that noted bio-chem authority Fred Astaire endorsed asbestos. No mention of California fires.

Link Le Trois: 2001 interview with crazy convicted environmentalist, on crazy convicted environmentalist's website. No mention of California fires.

Link D: Link to Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism's homepage. That's it. Link inflation. No mention of California fires.

Link The Fourth: A link to MIPT's Terrorism Knowledge Base entry on ELF! Hurrah! Oh, but mention of Calfornia fires.

Cinqo El Linko: Holy shit! A mention of the California fires! Buuut it's from The View.
George Carlin's embarrassing.
And did I mention it's The goddamn fucking View?

Link VI: One arson suspect shot and killed by authorities, another suspect arrested. After the previous five links it sort of feels like a complete non-sequiter, since it's about, y'know, AN EVENT OF ACTUAL FUCKING RELEVANCE TO THE CALIFORNIA FIRES.
No mention of eco-terrorism.

Link Seven: The profile of a lonely man who made an incredibly shitty FPP.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:30 PM on October 25, 2007 [9 favorites]

Your post was awful and jessamyn was trying to let you off nice and easy. You've made it awkward now. It's like you were in the middle of a breakup and she was breaking up with you, and told you that she just wanted to be friends and you said but I don't want to be just friends and now she's free to say well thank god for that and then she just picks up and leaves and you follow her out into the hallway of your apartment and you holler well I'm going to keep your stuff and she calls back ok great whatever keep it all I don't need it and the door slams and your apartment is empty and you're empty and all you've got is a note that says "this is a hand-waving OMGFilter post about something that has affected a lot of people in pretty bad ways, its a little early to bring out the conspiracy angles and this particular post is light on facts and heavy on the verbage. It might be better on your own blog or a group blog that appreciates a good raised eyebrow approach to current events." and you keep reading it and you know that if she hadn't written that note your post would still be around and you'd still be happy inside
posted by boo_radley at 10:33 PM on October 25, 2007 [26 favorites]

Nice. I kept reading it and didn't want the story to end.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:43 PM on October 25, 2007

Finally, someone who understands what I'm going through.
posted by sluglicker at 10:44 PM on October 25, 2007

America we stand as one.

My feet hurt. Can I sit?
posted by homunculus at 11:00 PM on October 25, 2007 [1 favorite]

Sorry, the actual deletion reason should have been stated: "This post is deleted because you failed to spell 'disaster' correctly."
posted by SassHat at 12:17 AM on October 26, 2007

I think users should be deleted and there should be snarky deletion reasons.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 12:29 AM on October 26, 2007

One sentence? Who are you and what have you done with EB?!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:11 AM on October 26, 2007 [3 favorites]

I think Cortex said it well: "None of the links were actually particularly good. I checked them all. It was not clear at all from the post whether you were presenting this as an actual statement about eco-terrorism or a commentary on the existence of opinions about eco-terrorism or what, but it was kind of a mess in general."

I thought it was a freakin' incredible post, and as I read the comments I sat here thinking, "Nobody gets it. Nobody has a clue." See how superior I am to all of you?

see, you really do need your own blog for this
posted by caddis at 4:37 AM on October 26, 2007

Santa Ana winds
blow through a series of tubes
and yet feed no flames
posted by flabdablet at 5:49 AM on October 26, 2007 [1 favorite]

Hey, uh, just for the record, it sure sounds like sluglicker's fully digested the reasons for the deletion. Y'all can probably stop breaking it down for him now (unless that's what gets you off, in which case you're a jerkface).

Additionally, I'd like to point out that I totally favorited pokermonk's dead-on suggestion. But it was only later that I realized that doing so was EPONYSTERICAL! GO ME!
posted by 2or3whiskeysodas at 6:35 AM on October 26, 2007

Words is not important, but the way we use them are.
posted by Sparx at 6:55 AM on October 26, 2007

Potatoe.
posted by flabdablet at 6:56 AM on October 26, 2007

STAEB!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:11 AM on October 26, 2007

we may never know if the women with flags painted on their naked bodies were hot or not.

Be assured they were true Patriotits.
posted by srboisvert at 7:24 AM on October 26, 2007

Another thread in which I got involved basically laid out moderation as this: Metafilter is an oligarchy, not a democracy. Cortex, Jessamyn, and Matt are the people in control of the site, and who make the judgment call. Posts in Metatalk are people's attempt to influence, change, argue, and/or adjust the internal/external guidelines by which the mods make their decisions. But in the end, it's their call, because it's their site. Technically, users are needed for the generation of Metafilter's blood -- its posts and comments -- but they're always going to have that, and, further, there are people who are always going to rigorously defend the status quo, because that's what people do.

I'm firmly convinced that the MeTa posts that permit whining about post deletions elsewhere are absolutely useless. By this point in the process, the guidelines and the group 'taste' of "what makes a good FPP" is so very calcified into place that there's virtually no likelihood that any new input will cause an adjustment. As a result, these threads just end up being whiny, arguing bitch- and snarkfests that repeat on an annoyingly cyclical basis. (And, yes, I am aware that at one point I once was one of those who bitched. To quote annoying '90s pop, I saw the sign, and it opened up my eyes.)

Or, to put it another way, for God's sake, sit down and shut the fuck up.
posted by WCityMike at 7:41 AM on October 26, 2007

Every thirty or so MetaTalk posts bitching about deletion, one of the admins should just say, "You know what? You're right," and undelete the thread. Bonus points if it's one of the admins disagreeing with the other two, and if the thread wasn't even a borderline deletion (self-link spam, maybe). Just to keep things interesting, of course.
posted by danb at 7:46 AM on October 26, 2007

I forgot to complete my thought:

Technically, users are needed for the generation of Metafilter's blood -- its posts and comments -- but they're always going to have that, and, further, there are people who are always going to rigorously defend the status quo, because that's what people do. Added: In the end, Mefites as an aggregate are important — the site would collapse without content, but the site will never NOT have Mefites. Thus, individually, you are not a special and unique snowflake, and no one gives one flipping, flying fuck if you're so upset that your front page post got deleted that you leave the site. Because there will always be someone to replace you.

posted by WCityMike at 7:54 AM on October 26, 2007 [2 favorites]

As a result, these threads just end up being whiny, arguing bitch- and snarkfests...

Am I the only one who comes here for the whiny, arguing bitch- and snarkfests? (and does that make me a bad person?)
posted by qldaddy at 8:09 AM on October 26, 2007 [2 favorites]

Wait, so the America-haters were both the victims and the perpetrators of the fires? That's some first-class scamming, pinkos!
posted by Atom Eyes at 9:33 AM on October 26, 2007

I'm firmly convinced that the MeTa posts that permit whining about post deletions elsewhere are absolutely useless.
posted by WCityMike at 9:41 AM on October 26 [+] [!]

They're not completely useless. They have gobs and gobs of entertainment value.
posted by jtron at 9:39 AM on October 26, 2007

Amen to that, WCityMike.

One sentence? Who are you and what have you done with EB?!

I hear EB wrote a lengthy piece, but Jessamyn cruelly deleted it because she didn't understand it.
posted by mkultra at 9:39 AM on October 26, 2007

Do people from Southern California view us folks from the hurricane-prone areas in the same way we view those of you who live in an area consistently devastated by fire fueled by the Santa Ana winds? By that I mean, with a jaundiced, "why don't you just move then?" eye?

Because I've only been personally affected by two hurricanes in 41 years, since my area is sheltered by an inlet and I would never build a condo on the beach, but every year here we get the news guys in the bright orange rain suits going out in the storm to warn everyone not to go out in the storm, and the same footage of folks storming the warehouse outlets in a mad dash for plywood. And I know the weather guys are panic-mongering and take them with a grain of salt.

So, are people all over Southern California really falling apart over these fires? I know there has been lots of damage done in specific sectors, but isn't that to be expected given the history of the area? Because it seems like these fires happen every year and people are surprised every year, and I thought, honestly, a lot of it was the panic-mongering news guys having a field day.
posted by misha at 10:03 AM on October 26, 2007

Do people from Southern California view us folks from the hurricane-prone areas in the same way we view those of you who live in an area consistently devastated by fire fueled by the Santa Ana winds? By that I mean, with a jaundiced, "why don't you just move then?" eye?

[...]

So, are people all over Southern California really falling apart over these fires?

To an extent, yeah, that's the way I at least tend to view it.

And, much like you with hurricanes, fires in the past have rarely impacted me or anybody that I knew, but these fires seem to have had a lot more impact. I know of some of our offices that had to be evacuated, and I know of some of my employees that had to go meet family that were fleeing from areas that were burned, and at least in my experience, that's never happened before, so this year has seemed to be a great deal worse than it has in the past.
posted by willnot at 10:44 AM on October 26, 2007

“I think it's an aquired taste, the naked girl in flag paint thing, but you can see it here.”

Is anyone else fascinated by the fact that naked people with body paint can look like they're not naked? For example, in that photo, I can look closely and see every body feature just like I can with a non-painted naked person, but my brain just doesn't react to the photo as if those women were naked. I react to it as if they were wearing bikinis. Which, I suppose, isn't that much different. But the effect is so pronounced with body painting that it sort of freaks me out.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:18 PM on October 26, 2007

no one gives one flipping, flying fuck if you're so upset that your front page post got deleted that you leave the site. Because there will always be someone to replace you.

I'm not sure if this bears more examination, but from our perspective, some of these discussions getting into Metatalk is pretty important. I mean, I don't particularly like it when people call each other names and generally act like chuckleheads, but if we have to make a judgment call on something and then a bunch of people here are like "um that wasn't such a great idea, here's why...." it's helpful information moving forward, for us. Without community feedback on admin decisions and transparency of those decisions the site really does become just "mathowie's weblog that he lets other people comment on" and I think for a lot of people it's more than that.

And yeah sure there will always be new people who come in, but I think we've seen in MeTa that some people leave the site and are missed FOREVER and others, not so much.

So, while I find the huffy "let's call the admins names because we don't like what they did" attitude a bit off-putting, I think coming to Meta when you're upset about a deletion is an appropiate use of MetaTalk and people who come in here acting like MeTa is a precious resource that others are wasting seems a little strange to me. It's possible that we could get to a point where all of our admin time was taken up responding to spurious claims, but we don't see much of that. Both cortex and I have gotten better at not feeling like we have to respond to every allegation tossed our way in a 250 comment thread, but having people have the ability to have their concerns heard and responded to is important.
posted by jessamyn at 2:31 PM on October 26, 2007 [1 favorite]

> it's helpful information moving forward, for us. Without community feedback on admin decisions and transparency of those decisions the site really does become just "mathowie's weblog that he lets other people comment on" and I think for a lot of people it's more than that.

You say this, Jess, but ... well, perhaps I'm not being perceptive enough, but I've really seen no change in your guys' outlook or modding behavior as a result of MeTa threads. The way I accept that is by saying it's "mathowie's and jessamyn's and cortex's blog that they let other people contribute to and comment on and due to that and its age and its celebrity it's got a nice community around it", and that's separate from my feelings on Ask Mefi which is, I think, less moderated and manifests the miracle of the hivemind a bit more. But I view it as your guys' blog because, well, no disrespect intended, but the moderation is very much in evidence and, to me (and as someone once pointed out I follow Meta far too much), I don't really see any evidence that Meta changes your guys' minds. At all.
posted by WCityMike at 2:47 PM on October 26, 2007

Sorry, Jess is a bit informal, and I don't even know if you use it. I have another online friend named Jessamyn who I refer to as Jess rather frequently.
posted by WCityMike at 2:48 PM on October 26, 2007

the moderation is very much in evidence and, to me (and as someone once pointed out I follow Meta far too much), I don't really see any evidence that Meta changes your guys' minds. At all.

And I can tell you it does. You can decide what you want to do with that information.
posted by jessamyn at 2:52 PM on October 26, 2007

but I've really seen no change in your guys' outlook or modding behavior as a result of MeTa threads

WCityMike, it may be that the things that you wish to see change are the things that aren't changing to your satisfaction. The details of of site administration have definitely swayed and evolved a fair bit over time, and a stark reaction in Metatalk now and then has been a really useful metric for me personally in understanding how people perceive moderation (mine as well as Jessamyn's and Matt's).
posted by cortex at 2:59 PM on October 26, 2007

"Why was my post deleted?" ought to be an automatic banhammer.

Just sayin'.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 9:07 PM on October 26, 2007

MetaFilter: Jessamyn, your reason for deleting the post is ridiculous
posted by KokuRyu at 11:24 PM on October 26, 2007

Jessamyn, I'm not questioning your word, but with all due respect, "just trust me" isn't a useful response. Cortex, I really nowadays don't have anything I want to see change, so I don't have a dog in this fight. That having been said, to both of you: if I'm wrong, what has changed as a result of Meta threads?
posted by WCityMike at 10:53 AM on October 27, 2007 [1 favorite]

I'm not questioning your word, but with all due respect, "just trust me" isn't a useful response.

When you're alleging that our state of minds haven't changed as a result of things that have happened in MetaTalk, I don't know what else to tell you. Maybe you asked the wrong question? How can I prove my outlook has changed, to your satisfaction? I feel that going over this again -- "Well in this MetaTalk thread I learned to appreciate that people may be sensitive to us using the verb gyp as a perjorative term so I avoid using it" -- isn't serving much of a purpose, but maybe I'll make this list to point to for later.

Frankly, if you're not seeing the way things have changed, or the number of threads where we respond along the lines of "well maybe we've been a little tight in politicalfilter moderation lately so maybe we'll ease off a bit" then my listing them again may not make it clearer for you.

Part of being a member of this site is trusting, generally, that the mods are doing what they say that they're doing and acting how they say they're acting. We have MetaTalk callouts when we're not walking the talk for one thing, among other reaons. It's also trusting that the other members of the site are going to act generally in line with how they've been acting and that certain behaviors are sanctioned by the community and certain ones aren't. However, it's a leap of faith to presume that because it's always been that way, it's how it's going to be in the future and that's where trust comes in.

if I'm wrong, what has changed as a result of Meta threads?

It's not a case of being wrong or right, it's a case of what cortex said upthread: lots of stuff has changed in the way the site is run and if you don't see that, I'm not sure what the mechanism is that will make it more obvious to you.

- the fact that I even work here is a result of at least some activity in MeTa, ditto cortex and pb
- our reasons for deletion are much less snarky
- our reasons for deletion are longer and more explanatory than they used to be
- metatalk threads don't vanish without a trace as often, now they're closed with a reason for deletion
- metatalk threads aren't closed as often [or sometimes this goes the other way and they're closed more, but it ebbs and flows with community opinion]
- jargon that is often used here has been put on the FAQ and/or the wiki so it's more clear and linked to if we think it will be unclear
- we've come to an understanding about site practice for spoilers and nsfw tags
- we've come to an understanding about why tags are used and what the moderator's role is in editing or adding tags
- we've come to an understanding about when we edit anything in a user's posts or comments
- we now have auto-timeout options for users so they can take a day or a week off without us having to do anything
- I usually email/PM new users when they have a comment deleted in AskMe

Most of those things came about because they were brought up in MeTa first. There's also the continuum we see on our end which is that user feedback consists of flags, MetaTalk, emails, IMs and other interactions, all of which we take into account so it's hard to just peel off Meta on its own. I suppose it could be argued that mathowie may have done all those things on his own without MeTa but I think that's a stretch.

- and, I know you didn't ask about this specifically but FEATURES: favorites, private messaging, in-line favoriting, flickr photos, "also on", geolocating, meetup lists, tags, status blog, 8th anniversary party, nearby MeFites etc. Look at the features request category for more examples.
posted by jessamyn at 12:17 PM on October 27, 2007 [1 favorite]

My recent post was deleted and I'm going to bitch about it. October 25, 2007 8:32 PM Subscribe

My recent post was deleted and I'm going to bitch about it.
October 25, 2007 8:32 PM Subscribe