No more Ron Paul, please November 25, 2007 3:23 PM   Subscribe

Policy regarding political fundraising, campaigning or other support sites for Ron Paul?

I have noticed increasing numbers of posts (recent example) which are direct or indirect fundraising or stump sites for Ron Paul — it seems to be a couple a week.

Above and beyond my dislike for this person and his politics (which I do not intend to start a discussion about) — and without calling into question any motivations of the original poster — I do not feel that these meet the criteria for acceptable front page posts.

Assuming the community agrees, I wonder if there can be a deletion policy applied which is also used for other political-themed posts (e.g. the recent TPM post), as well as a spinning alert banner similar to that used in the past as a warning for Iraq- and Israel-themed posts.

If I'm wrong about the extent of the problem, or if it is even a problem (something that the community may not agree with) then I apologize and please feel free to delete or close this post.
posted by Blazecock Pileon to Etiquette/Policy at 3:23 PM (81 comments total)

RON PAUL.
posted by Krrrlson at 3:24 PM on November 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


YOU HAVE BEEN RONPAULED.
posted by Krrrlson at 3:25 PM on November 25, 2007 [5 favorites]


Dr. Paul has some good ideas.
posted by 31d1 at 3:26 PM on November 25, 2007 [2 favorites]


PON RAUL amirite guys?

(not a spy)

TELL ME YOUR SECRETS
posted by tehloki at 3:26 PM on November 25, 2007 [4 favorites]


It's okay, Dr. Paul is used to being SILENCED ALL HIS LIFE.
posted by 31d1 at 3:27 PM on November 25, 2007 [15 favorites]


Same goes for the Australian labour party.
posted by public at 3:27 PM on November 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


I deleted it, and it seems like we're deleting at least one or two Ron Paul posts a week, so very few stick around. I'm not going to let this place turn into fucking digg with all the stupid ass Ron Paul posts.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 3:28 PM on November 25, 2007 [34 favorites]


Yeah, you're right in my opinion and the flag queue seem to agree with you. "Soandso had a novel fundraising idea [link]" posts tend to not be very good and Ron Paul variants of them -- I couldn't even wait for that page to load, I hope it's a nice blimp -- are worse.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 3:28 PM on November 25, 2007


That site was hilarious and I think it was posted more as a brilliant example of Paul and his supporters enthusiasm/lunacy than a political or fundraising ploy.

Please no Paulban. There will come a time when this may become necessary, but fortunately now is not the time.
posted by willie11 at 3:29 PM on November 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


In all seriousness, some posts may not actually qualify for front page status, but a post that annoys you does not automatically qualify for deletion. We have mods for a reason.

Personally, I think the post you link as an example borders on parody, and if it isn't, then it's damn funny anyway.
posted by tehloki at 3:29 PM on November 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


Fwiw, as much as I dislike Ron Paul spam, I thought this one could be exempt from the Ronpaulatorium just because it was so ridiculously funny. I mean, come on... Ron Paul blimp!
posted by Krrrlson at 3:29 PM on November 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


preview, damnit.

Well, it looks like in this case, the mods agree with you.
posted by tehloki at 3:31 PM on November 25, 2007


I wish Kucinich had a blimp.
posted by TheOnlyCoolTim at 3:31 PM on November 25, 2007 [3 favorites]


I thoroughly agree with both callout and deletion. Let's nip this weed in the bud.
posted by languagehat at 3:31 PM on November 25, 2007


God damn it, I just realized you wrote "diluted" instead of "deluded".
posted by puke & cry at 3:31 PM on November 25, 2007


That site was hilarious

All I saw was a bunch of images of blimps made in Microsoft Paint with donate buttons.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 3:33 PM on November 25, 2007


In all seriousness, some posts may not actually qualify for front page status, but a post that annoys you does not automatically qualify for deletion. We have mods for a reason.

That's fair, but I'd note that I don't make a habit of starting Metatalk posts to complain about other front page posts.

It's not that this particular post annoyed me, so much as a class of posts, and thought it would be worthwhile to start a dialogue about.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 3:35 PM on November 25, 2007


up yours!
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 3:36 PM on November 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


by 'you' did you mean 'you'?
posted by empath at 3:36 PM on November 25, 2007


Hillary Clinton
Ron Paul
Barrack Obama
posted by public at 3:42 PM on November 25, 2007


That site was hilarious and I think it was posted more as a brilliant example of Paul and his supporters enthusiasm/lunacy than a political or fundraising ploy.

Struth. His policies leave me either befuddled or repelled, but the idea of a blimp has a strange genius to it, forcing recognition past a system dedicated to ignoring & sidelining him. If ever there was a case of bypassing the media filters, this would be it. Plus it's just so funny I laughed for several minutes when I first came across it. It's hacking the system on a grand scale, whoever's behind it.
posted by scalefree at 3:42 PM on November 25, 2007 [2 favorites]


Jesus christ, I meant "I", not you.

I'm distracted by football.
posted by puke & cry at 3:42 PM on November 25, 2007


Bah spelling and copy and paste failure on the Barrack (Barack) link.
posted by public at 3:43 PM on November 25, 2007


I've been seeing a lot of Ron Paul comment spam in a lot of places. It's not automated spam - it's human beings posting comments and bringing Ron Paul links in on either very thin or no pretext at all.

It's pretty annoying.
posted by ikkyu2 at 3:43 PM on November 25, 2007


J O S I A H
posted by Dreamghost at 3:45 PM on November 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


My question is, why aren't we comparing Ron Paul's face to a diseased rectum? AMIRITE???
posted by SeizeTheDay at 3:49 PM on November 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


Y'know, I can understand not wanting notification every time the guy takes a crap, but this was just plain funny. It wasn't even being hijacked by Paul supporters & people seemed to be getting the joke. Y'all need to lighten up, I think.
posted by scalefree at 3:50 PM on November 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


I can see where scalefree is coming from, the post was obviously mocking ron paul. I'm just so damn sick of seeing shit about that guy I flagged it anyway.
posted by puke & cry at 3:51 PM on November 25, 2007


I bet a post about Ron Paul getting an iPhone would stay.
posted by grouse at 3:55 PM on November 25, 2007 [2 favorites]


site:metafilter.com vs the internet according to google.

Ron Paul - 1280 of 9.9 million
Barack Obama - 926 of 3.4 million
Dennis Kucinich - 322 of 1.6 million
Mike Gravel - 281 of 1.6 million
Hillary Clinton - 1520 of 7.7 million
John Edwards - 636 of 5.4 million
Mitt Romney - 573 of 2.5 million
John McCain - 1160 of 2.3 million
Rudy Giuliani - 505 of 3.5 million
posted by public at 4:00 PM on November 25, 2007 [8 favorites]


"Assuming the community agrees, I wonder if there can be a deletion policy applied which is also used for other political-themed posts (e.g. the recent TPM post), as well as a spinning alert banner similar to that used in the past as a warning for Iraq- and Israel-themed posts."

We're all adults here. Any one of us can click "next post". Annoying spinning banners or snarky deletions aren't needed; people are fully capable of figuring out what a post's about.

Besides, on Ron Paul in particular, I'd have thought you'd be all for posts about a guy who has the potential to start a civil war inside the Republican Party.
posted by orthogonality at 4:08 PM on November 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


mathowie writes "I deleted it, and it seems like we're deleting at least one or two Ron Paul posts a week, so very few stick around. "

Which is what you did about Abu Gonzales posts. The response, if I recall correctly, was increasing numbers of Abu Gonzales posts and increasing numbers of deletions, until we reached an acrimonious Metatalk kerfluffle over snarky deletions, in which snarky moderations promised to tone it down. The zeitgeist is going to show up; trying to stem that tide with deletions only results in more posts and more acrimony.

Do yourself a favor, set up a "Ron Paul Phenomenon" FPP like the initial Australia Election one, and hope to contain the disruption to that one post. Everyonr will be happier, and you'll look forward-thinking and tolerant and you won't have to waste your time deleting Ron Paul posts and I won't have to waste my time making snarky comments only to see the threads containing my snark deleted.
posted by orthogonality at 4:16 PM on November 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


I think we need some form of web-poll to determine this issue.
posted by pompomtom at 4:17 PM on November 25, 2007


Besides, on Ron Paul in particular, I'd have thought you'd be all for posts about a guy who has the potential to start a civil war inside the Republican Party.

A critical, informative, thoughtful best-of-the-web find might discuss the historical dangers of American populism — which reaches across the left and right divide — and Ron Paul's Buzz Windrip- or Huey Long-esque nature.

Most (perhaps all) of the Ron Paul posts on Metafilter so far have been promotional sites, directly or indirectly.

I think there is a distinct, qualitative difference between these two types of posts.

I would be I am as much against posting links to campaign sites for Hillary or Obama, for the same reason.

Spinning banners or their equivalent highlight that the bar is raised for Ron Paul material — a need to meet more stringent criteria.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:22 PM on November 25, 2007


The zeitgeist is going to show up; trying to stem that tide with deletions only results in more posts and more acrimony.

orthogonality, if the posts were interesting and the sites linked were truly revolutionary, they'd stick around. So far it's been thinly veiled GIVE MONEY TO RON PAUL CAUSE HE'S AWESOME AND WE'LL FINALLY GET BACK TO THE GOLD STANDARD YEAH! posts that contain 1 or 2 marginal links to stuff that all points to donate buttons, or it's news stories about how much he has raised.

Look, we got tired of the Dean! Dean! Dean! crap in 2003 (I even made a site parodying them) and the Nader! Nader! Nader! in 2000 and we deleted any and all stuff that wasn't interesting or major pieces of news. Every marginal thing was deleted just like we'll continue doing with Ron Paul, Guliani, Hillary, and/or Obama posts. It's not a "no Ron Paul posts evar!" rule, it's the same standard we use on every post here, which is roughly "are the sites linked to interesting?"
posted by mathowie (staff) at 4:25 PM on November 25, 2007


So, even tho he won't get a political party nomination, we can still write him in on election day, right?
posted by Balisong at 4:28 PM on November 25, 2007


Ron Paul?
posted by Effigy2000 at 4:33 PM on November 25, 2007


Ron Paul%
posted by Balisong at 4:34 PM on November 25, 2007


I actually gave money to Ron Paul even though I think he's a loon, just because I felt like stirring shit up on the GOP side.
posted by empath at 4:48 PM on November 25, 2007


The annoyance of Ron Paul Threads has been I think elevated on my radar by the fact that at least two recent posts about the dude have been made by the same user. I don't think that the problem has gotten epidemic, really, just that with all the Paul stuff on the net in general (Digg Paul being the biggest example I can think of off hand) people are kind of sore about it.

If people keep making crappy Ron Paul posts, we'll keep deleting them. I expect that if people make good Ron Paul posts, we'll let 'em stand unless it's too often in which case we'll delete and say "take it to the open thread". That's pretty much the standard procedure, really.

Independent of which, I think that THE RONNER THEY ARE, THE HARDER THEY PAUL would make a great bumpersticker.
posted by cortex (staff) at 4:54 PM on November 25, 2007 [2 favorites]


"One time I was with Ron Paul in the back of a pickup truck, along with a live deer. Ron Paul goes up to the deer and says, 'I'm Ron Paul! SAY IT!' Then he manipulates the deer's lips in such a way as to make it say, 'RonPaul' ... It wasn't exactly like it, but it was pretty good for a deer"
posted by growabrain at 5:03 PM on November 25, 2007 [3 favorites]


MetaFilter: not going to turn into fucking digg with all the stupid ass Ron Paul posts.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 5:11 PM on November 25, 2007 [2 favorites]


I'd feel a lot more sympathetic to the people complaining that Ron Paul is being ignored by the media and the public if they could also tell me who the current contenders for the Green and Libertarian nominations are (without googling). Dr. Paul may be a mutant, but he's still in the same monoculture.
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 5:26 PM on November 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


I just don't get why so many people find it so important to post links about a tall skinny drag queen whose moment has long passed, blimps be damned.
posted by googly at 5:33 PM on November 25, 2007


I've been seeing a lot of Ron Paul comment spam in a lot of places. It's not automated spam - it's human beings posting comments and bringing Ron Paul links in on either very thin or no pretext at all.

Ron Paul is the only candidate for any national office that I've ever seen personally write a comment in the comments section of a blog post. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing, but it is unique. And it was completely on topic as the post was about the various Republican candidates including him.
posted by scalefree at 5:44 PM on November 25, 2007


In all seriousness, I agree with the original post.
posted by googly at 5:52 PM on November 25, 2007


So, Matt, would you let Ron Paul become a M/Wefite, assuming he paid his $5, or would that be too disruptive to the non-political nature Metafilter has become? He's one of the only contenders who really knows, you know, how to use the internet, and actually converses with people. I'd say he would have the same banhammer over his head for self-linking, but it would probably net you a pretty penny once all his followers follow.

You could probably afford to hire another mod just to follow his posts around for crowd control.
posted by Balisong at 6:06 PM on November 25, 2007


links about a tall skinny drag queen

Is this still Ron Paul, or are we back onto the "I'll call Ann Coulter whatever I want" theme for the Grey?
posted by subbes at 6:32 PM on November 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


"Racist Wilson Ron Paul, you can’t hide, we charge you with genocide!"

"Wilson, Ron Paul you are all wet!”
posted by orthogonality at 6:57 PM on November 25, 2007


WHO IS RON PAUL?
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 7:10 PM on November 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


Unfortunately TPS, the Paulites are also mostly Randians, so they're already using that one.
posted by empath at 7:20 PM on November 25, 2007


Uh, subbes? googly was intentionally confusing Ron Paul for Ru Paul, who is a tall skinny drag queen.

YHBT. YHL. HAND.
posted by blasdelf at 7:24 PM on November 25, 2007


Do yourself a favor, set up a "Ron Paul Phenomenon" FPP like the initial Australia Election one, and hope to contain the disruption to that one post.

Gawd no.

For one thing, threads are only open 30 days before closure. You want it renewed every 30 days until Paul finally concedes?

And if we're doing that for Ron Paul, then surely we need ones for the other scourges of hatchet postings -- LOLXIANS, LOLDUBYABUSHHITLER, LOLFORMULAFEEDERS....

And if we're doing that... isn't MeFi at that point just another forum, minus phpBB?

Mattamyntex have been doing just fine sorting the wheat from the chaff. I think they'll continue to, despite their missteps. MeFi is different -- and better -- because it's well moderated.

If Dr. Paul really does something notable, we'll hear about it. But I don't think we need to hear about the Ron Paul Blimp any more than I need to hear yet again how Barack Obama's middle name is Hussein.
posted by dw at 7:39 PM on November 25, 2007


So, Matt, would you let Ron Paul become a M/Wefite, assuming he paid his $5, or would that be too disruptive to the non-political nature Metafilter has become?

We'd so let him in. And, yeah, he'd be banned a week and three throwaway comments later when he linked to a blimp fundraiser.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:21 PM on November 25, 2007 [2 favorites]


I find Ron Paul related posts helpful and informative, because when someone outs themselves as being a Ron Paul supporter, I can conveniently add them to my mental list of people to never take seriously ever again.
posted by cmonkey at 8:45 PM on November 25, 2007 [8 favorites]


I can't tell whether my silly joke passed straight over subbes' head, or whether that was an inspired rejoinder. If the latter: touché, subbes!
posted by googly at 9:13 PM on November 25, 2007


I'm down with him being against the war and I'm a little concerned about the gold standard thing, but I'm particularly nervous that he wants to launch all the black people and Mexicans into outer space... At this point I guess we just have to hope that he moderates his views, because as far as I am aware, internet Ayn Rand neckbeard cosplay-wanking Klingon dagger buying dork-asses with a surplus of bedsheets they can hang off of highway overpasses and Digg accounts are the only people who are allowed to vote in the next election, correct me if I'm wrong.
posted by Divine_Wino at 9:15 PM on November 25, 2007 [7 favorites]


i don't agree with everything i've heard from ron paul, but he's an intriguing candidate who seems to be more upfront than the others. frequently, the amount of ridicule and vituperation seen here conceals an apprehension that the subject is a viable candidate who might win. haven't decided who i'll vote for, but the others have high negatives too.
posted by bruce at 10:01 PM on November 25, 2007


Is this still Ron Paul, or are we back onto the "I'll call Ann Coulter whatever I want" theme for the Grey?

This is still about Ron Paul, but if Ann Coulter can get away with calling other people faggots, then her apologists on Metafilter will just have to live occasionally with people in the real world calling her whatever names she's earned in exchange for the things she says and does. She and her apologists on the Grey may just have to learn to deal.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:52 PM on November 25, 2007 [2 favorites]


frequently, the amount of ridicule and vituperation seen here conceals an apprehension that the subject is a viable candidate who might win.
I hate that terrible logic. "People are mocking him, so they must secretly fear him!" Perhaps we mock him and his supporters because is inherently worthy of mockery? Sometimes a Ron Paul is just a Ron Penis. Damn it.
posted by Sangermaine at 11:03 PM on November 25, 2007


Related, from Projects.

(first link starts embedded video. boy does it.)
posted by mediareport at 11:14 PM on November 25, 2007


that is the logic of someone who was often told "they're only picking on you because you're smarter than them."
posted by empath at 12:24 AM on November 26, 2007


I love Ron Paul, and I can never get tricked into hearing his great song, Never Gonna Give You Up, often enough for my tastes.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 2:56 AM on November 26, 2007


Hey Peter! Check out the cool new Ron Paul campaign theme song.
posted by Meatbomb at 4:05 AM on November 26, 2007


I'm OK with it, the Ron Paul fundraising posts that is.

cmonkey, if I have somehow managed to miss your list please add me.
posted by BigSky at 4:58 AM on November 26, 2007


Uh, subbes? googly was intentionally confusing Ron Paul for Ru Paul, who is a tall skinny drag queen.


What? I thought he was talking about Giuliani.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 7:11 AM on November 26, 2007 [1 favorite]


Don't worry, Divine_Wino. I expect that come election day, a lot of Ron Paul supporters won't have bothered to register to vote, or won't have known they were supposed to.
posted by hydrophonic at 7:29 AM on November 26, 2007


Ron Paul's ass is crazy.
posted by chunking express at 8:42 AM on November 26, 2007


Most (perhaps all) of the Ron Paul posts on Metafilter so far have been promotional sites, directly or indirectly.

Really? As in ones that weren't deleted within a couple of hours of being posted?

I'm pretty ardent in my support of Ron Paul and I've only had the opportunity to talk about him in two threads. Notice the contemptuous tone in the more recent FPP, e.g. "conspiracy driven" and "spittle-flecked anger". The second one is favorable to Ron Paul and as far as I know it's the only one that wasn't deleted. Prior to those two threads there was this one, from March. That FPP, textbook newsfilter, linked to his own website, not that of the presidential campaign.

Those are the only Ron Paul posts I've seen here, but I'm sure I could have missed some. Please do point me to some of these promotional Ron Paul posts that constitute the majority.
posted by BigSky at 10:55 AM on November 26, 2007


There's also this and the Sex Pistols post. Which, yeah, okay.

That there have been a few recent deleted Go Ron Go posts is probably, as I was kind of trying to get at above, what's got it on people's radar. No, Matt's "feels like we're killing two a week" remark is not literally true.

What is true is that we're dealing with more Ron Paul fanboy crap posts in the last month than crap posts on any other topic, and combined with the memey hypedness of Ron Paul on the net in general it's got us kind of jumpy and annoyed.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:19 AM on November 26, 2007


My mother-in-law is a scientologist and a Ron Paulian.
posted by Mister_A at 11:40 AM on November 26, 2007


Color me jumpy and annoyed.
posted by Mister_A at 11:41 AM on November 26, 2007


it's got us kind of jumpy and annoyed.

If I was a moderator I'd be rolling my eyes at them as well. A lot of the evangelists need to chill out and recognize that someone else's website is not their bully pulpit.

My post is just a raised eyebrow about the need for a discussion on the subject, especially from the member's perspective.

-----

puke & cry,

I'm sure you could give a damn, but it appears to be legit.
posted by BigSky at 12:03 PM on November 26, 2007


Ron Paul's in that new movie Starrbooty, no?
posted by yeti at 12:59 PM on November 26, 2007


What I really like about RonPaulBlimp.com is that the intro copy is an exceptionally clear window into the mind of your average diehard Ron Paul fan.

Note the use of words like "trance" and "mesmerized."

Seriously, I thought it was parody, and I was thinking, "Dude, that's pretty mean," before I read further down and realized the site was bloody serious. That's how this guy responds to the Ron Paul stimulus, and he really thinks people will respond likewise just to the sight of his name on an airship -- a mesmerized trance. For that revelation alone I think the post should have stayed.
posted by brownpau at 1:13 PM on November 26, 2007


A lot of the evangelists need to chill out

That's the understatement of the year. There's a Ron Paul asshole who's been going around Raleigh writing "RONPAUL2008.COM!!" in black marker all over everyone else's flyers. Music, housing, events, whatever, they all get multiple scrawls of "RONPAUL2008.COM!!" After the big fundraising day, the marker got replaced with a rubber stamp (nice to see the dough filtering down to the grassroots, I guess). A friend who puts posters up for a living said he sees that bullshit everywhere.

When a Paulie came into our store and started earnestly evangelizing we got our golden opportunity to shut him up by forcefully telling him about the asshole with the rubber stamp. About a week later, he forwarded me an email from one of the regional Paulies to an allegedly extensive Paulie mailing list that expressed shock and outrage that a fellow libertarian would violate the sanctity of private property in such a manner. Not quite the moral position I'd take, but still. It was something. We'll see if it works.

Bottom line: For whatever reason, Ron Paul is drawing obnoxious flakes to his campaign like flies to shit, and the only way to shut them up, it seems, is by smacking them down. Hard.

Complaining about the reaction to morons like that is hilarious. Good luck with that.
posted by mediareport at 2:34 PM on November 26, 2007


BigSky
If I was a moderator I'd be rolling my eyes at them as well. A lot of the evangelists need to chill out and recognize that someone else's website is not their bully pulpit.

And yet...
I'm OK with it, the Ron Paul fundraising posts that is.

You're too biased on this issue. You obviously like the guy, and can't seem to understand why we don't want to be flooded with sites pimping him. Try to be a little objective. Would you want a torrent of Giuliani fundraising posts? And note I said "fundraising" not news posts, because you specifically have said the fundraising posts are okay.
posted by Sangermaine at 4:08 PM on November 26, 2007


RON PAUL
STOP CONTRAILS
posted by Optimus Chyme at 5:00 PM on November 26, 2007 [1 favorite]


Sangermaine,

Actually, I do understand. My first comment was meant tongue in cheek. I've been one of the louder voices on the two Ron Paul threads we have had in the last six months (Sex Pistols excepted), and while I'm not a high profile member I thought those who cared enough about Ron Paul to read this thread might remember my participation and find the comment amusing. Perhaps not. Be that as it may, I do understand this isn't an appropriate place to shill for my candidate of choice. I haven't started any threads on him, nor will I. I know I've got a vested interest here and I'm not the one to decide if or when he's an appropriate subject for the front page. My participation on the subject is limited to threads where his candidacy has been raised as a subject. It's not like I've ever done something like go to a thread dedicated to Atget's photographs of the parks in Paris and remark, "You know this is interesting, it reminds me of how Ron Paul is the only presidential candidate from either party who is committed to not only restoring American citizens' civil rights and protecting their privacy but also restoring the Constitutionally intended boundaries of the executive branch...".

Yes, I know what you're on about and I respect it. Really.

-----

Bottom line: For whatever reason, Ron Paul is drawing obnoxious flakes to his campaign like flies to shit, and the only way to shut them up, it seems, is by smacking them down. Hard.

Complaining about the reaction to morons like that is hilarious. Good luck with that.


I'm not complaining about anything. I pointed to a misrepresentation.

But I get it, you're not interested in accuracy, you're 'telling me'. OK, dude. And if you want to portray this correction as another complaint, that's OK too.

I'll understand.
posted by BigSky at 7:54 PM on November 26, 2007


I too missed whatever "tongue in cheek"-ness you intended in your "I'm ok with fundraising posts" comment. It seemed pretty straightforward ridiculousness to me. I apologize if that wasn't your intent, and am glad to read that you're not intending to become one of the Ron Paul assholes shitting up both the online and offline worlds right now.
posted by mediareport at 7:55 AM on November 27, 2007


I'm glad I stuck around and made it clear. Smileys are completely goofy but they sure could be of help to those of us who are a bit clumsy with the prose. I'm still shunning them though.

Being OK with fundraising was meant to be ridiculous, but, uh, with me in on it too. Know that I see where you're coming from I recognize my own tone was a bit more mocking than warranted, and for that I'm sorry. It's easy to kick it into high gear with my ideological opponents, and I don't want to start caricaturing everyone I disagree with.
posted by BigSky at 10:32 AM on November 27, 2007


« Older offensive, sexist, NOT RACIST   |   Feature request: new activity link on Recent... Newer »

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