Comments on: Scrump Goes For Broke

Scrump Goes For Broke

scrump — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:34:15 -0800

Why is MetaFilter going downhill, and what are we going to do about it? I'm gonna take one right on the chin here and complain that MetaFilter just ain't what it used to be. I'm an idealist, and harbor the hope that maybe we can actually discuss the problem. HAHA. No, seriously. Anyway, take the time to read the Jeremiah Wright thread. Then take the time to read the NYPD thread. Both recent, both charged topics, and both threads going downhill fast. It seems, from the cheap seats, that there's an accelerating downward spiral in both civility and the general level of discourse on MetaFilter and its related sites, one that's persisting despite the increase in both number and involvement of the moderators. Yes, I know. NEWS AT ELEVEN. But we keep talking about this and not doing anything about it. There are a number of people who claim that MetaFilter is a community, one that by its very nature stands above and apart from other "community" sites, both in the quality of its membership and the quality of its discourse. I think it's getting more and more difficult to distinguish that difference: we're still more articulate than just about anywhere else, but that articulateness seems, more and more, to be deployed in the service of ad hominem attacks on each other and dismissive scorn about what's getting posted. Put another way, I used to be able to point people here and assume that it was self-evident that MetaFilter was of a higher quality, just from a cursory read. That's no longer the case. Personally, I think a good start might be closing registrations until after the election and instituting an instant week's vacation for ad-hominem attacks of any stripe, but that's me. On the other hand, maybe the real problem is that I keep saying "we". There is no "we", when it comes right down to it. There's mathowie, jessamyn, cortex and pb, and of those four, the fundamental ownership and vision of MetaFilter is mathowie's. We're just passengers. And, mathowie, at base, I think the real problem is that you seem to want this to be both consensus-driven and vision-driven, and neither one's working. I think someone needs to take a firm stand on what the vision of MetaFilter is, and make that happen, because we're sure as hell not getting anywhere good on our own. We're headed towards the least common denominator at a pretty rapid clip, and I think we need some stronger leadership to point the way to what MetaFilter is. Any decision you make, Matt, is going to have a cost. If you don't step in, people are going to leave because it just sucks here. It's already happening. If you do step in, you're going to take a load of shit from people who think they know better than you do what MetaFilter "should be". But, to be frank, they're wrong, and if they're going to leave because you're trying to actually keep MetaFilter on the road and out of the ditch, screw 'em. So consider this a plea for vision and leadership, Matt. It's your site, and it appears to be in trouble, so maybe it's time to wade in and make sure we're all on the same page.

By: Meatbomb

Meatbomb — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:45:17 -0800

It's my fault, I am sorry, and I will try to do better in the future.

By: sveskemus

sveskemus — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:46:31 -0800

*gets popcorn*

By: SeizeTheDay

SeizeTheDay — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:47:37 -0800

To quote an old member of this place:

shutup shutup shutup.

By: kittens for breakfast

kittens for breakfast — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:47:44 -0800

Why is MetaFilter going downhill, and what are we going to do about it?

Two words: BAN SCRUMP

By: smackfu

smackfu — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:49:03 -0800

Matt's too busy riding his new bike to care about Metafilter, fool.

By: jbickers

jbickers — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:49:20 -0800

Personally, I think a good start might be closing registrations until after the election

Interesting idea, although looks like most of the "bad behavior" in those threads you linked to is coming from long-time members.

By: Bookhouse

Bookhouse — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:50:05 -0800

Metafilter is not broken.

By: LarryC

LarryC — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:50:20 -0800

Politics poisons the site. Kill all the political posts or make a new subsite for them. Restore the "Best of the Web" motto to the logo and add "not the best of the web" to the choices for flagging.

Then prepare for a three month long shit storm.

By: jouke

jouke — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:51:20 -0800

and make sure we're all on this page
Only an awesome flameout can pull that off.

By: bondcliff

bondcliff — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:53:09 -0800

These “Metafilter isn’t as good as it used to be” threads used to be so much better before they let those filthy 2800ers into the joint.

By: scrump

scrump — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:53:32 -0800

Interesting idea, although looks like most of the "bad behavior" in those threads you linked to is coming from long-time members.

I have to say that I'm not a huge fan of someone getting cut slack because they've been here longer than others. In fact, I'd say that argues for them knowing better, and leading by example. And, if they don't, they should be subject to exactly the same penalties as anyone else.

I'm not sure I buy the whole "but X, Y or Z's personality makes MetaFilter what it is" argument, because MetaFilter seems to be what it is pretty much despite individual personalities, not because of them.

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:54:02 -0800

Well, I read both of those threadsd, and aside from the Wright one turning into ObamaFunFilter, I don't see them as being overly uncivil.

However, I did notice that you, scrump, only posted one comment in the Wright thread, and did not post at all in the NYPD thread. If people are being rude or personally insulting, you should post a comment right in the thread that asks them to cool it. I've done this, and it works far more effectively than a metatalk callout or a complaint to the moderators.

More importantly, the notion of downhill implies a starting point for the comparison. Please link to a day in the past that you think Metafilter was particularly "good" or "better" than it is now. I guarantee you that you will find instances of ad hominem attacks that are worse than you'll find now, primarily because the site doesn't seem to have extremely polarizing active posters right now, compared to the past.

By: Divine_Wino

Divine_Wino — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:54:14 -0800

I think it's a mistake to assume there is a hill for mefi to go down. There is plenty of civility and plenty of fuckerooity to go around and there always has been. I suggest your sample size is too small.

Personally I wish that people would refrain from posting a comment in a thread that complains about the content, quality or quantity of links and says nothing else at all. I think that, of all things, is an affront to the mefi ethos such as it can be said to exist. I especially wish that people would not make those comments in a snotty, schoolmarmish tone, as it reminds me of the thoughtless attention-seeking cruelty of children. I am, however, accustomed to disappointment.

Other than that, rage on I say, loosen the pins in your grenades and write your blood-type on your helmet, we are that we are.

By: saladin

saladin — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:54:34 -0800

This site has been on an undeniable downward slide since June 1, 2005.

By: Skorgu

Skorgu — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:54:54 -0800

Dunbar's Number.

By: The Jesse Helms

The Jesse Helms — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:55:03 -0800

I think someone needs to take a firm stand on what the vision of MetaFilter is, and make that happen

What the fuck does that even mean?

How about - the mysterious vision is everyone's reasoned and humane desires, in plain text, concisely told and built upon beautiful and differing ideas like a tower spiraling to reach Heaven.

We're almost there - stop trying to knock it down.

By: wheelieman

wheelieman — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:55:54 -0800

I dont think Mefi has gone downhill at all. If we bring up Religion or Politics in any thread, it will be heated without a doubt. But, there are some great threads with great comments within them (see sidebar) and I still think this place has standards. We are just fine for now, and try to look at the good threads. They are there. You just have to look for them harder.

By: PeterMcDermott

PeterMcDermott — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:57:58 -0800

So what's up with that Jeremiah Wright thread then? It's a good post, and the discourse looks pretty civil to me. Or have the mods already been at it?

But, hey, having a user number in the high 20,000's, I'm probably part of the problem, so what do I know?

By: BorgLove

BorgLove — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:58:33 -0800

If there really is a degradation problem as described by scrump, and I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing because I'm afraid of the backlash either way, it is probably exacerbated by the immense number of people who can't respond to anything other than by making a lame, smartass remark. I'm sure this thread will be a perfect example.

By: jbickers

jbickers — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:58:38 -0800

I have to say that I'm not a huge fan of someone getting cut slack because they've been here longer than others.

Not cutting anyone any slack, just pointing out that a temporary ban on new accounts doesn't speak to the problem you see.

As for that problem - respectfully, I just don't see it. I still think this is a wonderful place.

By: scrump

scrump — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:59:14 -0800

I guarantee you that you will find instances of ad hominem attacks that are worse than you'll find now

Pastabagel, I'm sure you're right. What's notable to me, right now, is the frequency with which this kind of stuff is happening. It's not just one or two people, it's five, or six, or ten people. And it's not just new people, it's old members as well.

It's like we've collectively decided that, fuck it, everyone else is behaving badly, I will too. And I'll freely confess that one of the things that made me post this today is that I wrote "go fuck yourself" in a comment on the blue. Big WTF moment, you might say: for some reason, my personal barometer for what was an acceptable level of discourse on the Blue had slipped to the point where I felt like it was okay to write that, and have it sit there.

So I looked around, and it seemed to me like a lot of people feel that way lately, and the site is suffering for it.

By: slogger

slogger — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:00:17 -0800

Huh, I was just reading the Hezbullah Tofu thread and thought, aside from a few old-timers acting like asshats, the discussion was pretty good, if not a little heated at times.

By: Stynxno

Stynxno — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:00:17 -0800

I think someone needs to take a firm stand on what the vision of MetaFilter is, and make that happen

This has already happened. It involves cats. On scanners.

By: danb

danb — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:03:17 -0800

My suggestion is to make the favoriting system invisible. Being able to see the number of favorites each comment has is an incentive for attention-seeking types to post flip one-liners instead of making meaningful contributions to conversations.

And actually, favorites aside the flip one-liner is a distressingly entrenched part of MeFi culture (on preview, what BorgLove said). Look at the types of comments in this thread so far:

*gets popcorn*

Two words: BAN SCRUMP

Matt's too busy riding his new bike to care about Metafilter, fool.

They're not exactly full-on derails, but they absolutely lower the level of discourse on the site. There are tons of comments here that show a greater interest in being clever than being interesting or meaningful. (I should point out that I don't mean to single out those particular users; most of us do it from time to time, myself included.)

I guess what I'm trying to say, scrump, is that closing accounts for a while or upping the ban rate is a technical solution for a social problem. I think the only way to raise the level of discourse is to actually do it ourselves.

By: By The Grace of God

By The Grace of God — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:04:14 -0800

Has there been any kind of measurable exodus of late or measurable degradation of site quality? Maybe the infodump could tell us this, or if not, could the admins?

By: [NOT HERMITOSIS-IST]

[NOT HERMITOSIS-IST] — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:06:54 -0800

I sort of disagree. I think that under the steady guidance of the mods, MeFi has proven to be capable of going through phases that would tank lesser sites. Die-offs and fluctuations in ph are just MetaFilter's way of cleaning and regulating itself.

By: agregoli

agregoli — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:07:29 -0800

This is going to be a shitstorm, or at least I think it will be.

But thanks for saying something. Some of the rudeness here I absolutely do not get. Attack my argument, fine, but insults against my personal feelings or me as a person are just rude and pointless and make me leave a thread these days. If you have so little respect for the person you're arguing with as to insult them because of their opinions, you're not worth talking to about that subject. And I see this happening to a lot of people lately.

That said, I think the mods are doing an excellent job at deleting objectionable things. I don't know what else can be done. It's not like you can make everyone play nice.

By: katillathehun

katillathehun — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:07:38 -0800

Something about a speck in a dude's eye and plank in yours or something.

By: Afroblanco

Afroblanco — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:08:16 -0800

Whenever I think of the word "difficult," I often think of a young, angry horse that refuses to be tamed. However, this may be because it contains the word "colt."

By: ND¢

ND¢ — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:08:26 -0800

As for the NYPD thread, we do bad-cop-filter about once a month and it is always ugly and I personally have been trying to stay out of them.

By: scrump

scrump — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:09:19 -0800

So what's up with that Jeremiah Wright thread then?

What's up with it is that it is, despite cortex posting (early on)

cortex: "Nicely done, Pater Aletheias.

Folks, it would be great if this thread could be more about Cone, Wright himself, and liberation theology in general, etc, and less a proxy for more election/primaries/Obama-vs-Clinton stuff. There's an epic Obama post that's still open and chock full of that kind of thing already, if you just can't contain yourselves."

it's still turning into an Obama/Clinton debate thread, with all the namecalling, strawmen and vitriol that can be expected from that particular debate.

By: Plutor

Plutor — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:09:43 -0800

MetaFilter has always sucked more than you remember.

Note that I'm resisting the urge to explicitly call scrump a fustian fuckwit.

By: kittens for breakfast

kittens for breakfast — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:09:45 -0800

They're not exactly full-on derails, but they absolutely lower the level of discourse on the site.

Well, really, they're not even close -- my comment was meant as good-natured joking around, and I figure that's true of the others as well. No offense, but if this is your idea of "lowering the discourse," the discourse must be quite low in your eyes pretty much all the time.

By: quonsar

quonsar — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:09:59 -0800

FISH. PANTS. DEAL.

By: MrMoonPie

MrMoonPie — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:11:54 -0800

To follow on to what jbickers (and others) is saying, the fact that the old-timers are part of the problem indicates to me that the problem is nothing new, or even a problem, really. Most of my recent dissatisfaction with the site is due to over-moderation--let folks be uncivil, sexist, and racist, as long as they're honest. If there is going to be heavy-handed moderation, make it consistent, at least, not reliant on the personal likes and dislikes of the moderators. This was a bad deletion, and badly justified, and there are lots more where that came from.

Kill favoriting, for one thing. As for vision, take it back to "best of the web." Politics, religion, music, any of that, is relevant only as it affects the web--the fact that a news story appears on some website somewhere isn't good enough. Return this site to a more web-centric focus, and that'll take care of a huge chunk of your complaints.

By: Krrrlson

Krrrlson — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:14:21 -0800

If we could simply cut off the right hands of the offenders, it would both provide a painful deterrent and limit the typing speed of the evildoers.

By: Artw

Artw — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:14:52 -0800

I liked Metafilter just the way it is.

Well, maybe one thing...

By: eyeballkid

eyeballkid — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:17:00 -0800

Yes, I know. NEWS AT ELEVEN. But we keep talking about this and not doing anything about it.

Yeah. Since the first days of MetaTalk, during the so-called good old days. This is the same bullshit Meta thread that comes up at least once a year. Political threads always devolve into a shit throwing contest, this was true in 2000, it was true in 2004, it's true now. The difference between the first two US elections mentioned and now is that you weren't a member.

Hell, it's been so long since Matt made the "MetaFilter doesn't do politics well" proclamation that I don't even remember when it was anymore or what it pertained to.

There were no good old days. The general level of conversation on this site is the same it was 8 years ago when I started reading it. MetaFilter is what it's been and it is what it is.

So consider this a plea for vision and leadership, Matt. It's your site, and it appears to be in trouble, so maybe it's time to wade in and make sure we're all on the same page.

Uh. Yeah. We're not all on the same page. That's the fucking point.

By: ND¢

ND¢ — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:18:42 -0800

I've been owning this lawn since long before you started standing on it!

By: ooga_booga

ooga_booga — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:20:25 -0800

Nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:20:54 -0800

Pastabagel, I'm sure you're right. What's notable to me, right now, is the frequency with which this kind of stuff is happening. It's not just one or two people, it's five, or six, or ten people. And it's not just new people, it's old members as well.

scrump, your basis of comparison is off. You should be comparing the heatedness of the discussion here with discussions of the same topic elsewhere, not compared to discussion of completely unrelated topics in the past. A few posts down on the front page we are having a very civil discussion of the history of automata throughout the ages. Why not compare it to that thread?

On the other hand, we could go over to LGF or FreeRepublic, or DailyKos and YouTube, and discuss who is more or less of a "fag" or a "race traitor", or whether "whites dont unnerstand blacks".

The discussions get hot because the topics are very controversial and people are very emotionally and personally invested in the outcome. What you are reading is in fact a very civil discussion about the most contested primary election in anyone's memory, all things considered. The mere fact that a heated discussion is taking place is a sign of a healthy community. In an unhealthy one, the post would never go up, or the people commenting would only come from one side of the issue or another.

And don't beat yourself up too much over an indiscretion. Go back to the thread, apologize, admit you were wrong, and make a self-deprecating joke, and everyone is happy. We all lose our shit every now and then. No autopsy, no foul.

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:22:04 -0800

MetaFilter: plenty of civility and plenty of fuckerooity to go around.

By: The Castle

The Castle — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:23:11 -0800

For what it is worth, scrump, I agree. Many years ago when I first started reading this site, there posts were generally about something neat on the web that you'd be hard pressed to find another way. When a news item hit the front page, the comments often had great additional info from someone in the know. There were arguments, sure, but they were usually interesting and well thought out, and the insults were more jovial and not as mean spirited. Of course there were crap posts, and crap comments, and crap posters back then, but the absolute number and the percentage of the whole seemed smaller back then. And there are still great posts, great comments and great discussions happening today! Probably even more in absolute numbers, but it seems like the percentage has gone down. What has filled the gap seems to be members talking about MeFi and each other. For those who want that, for threads to have lots of socializing, chit chat and whatnot it is great. I won't say that is wrong, or not what MetaFilter should be. But I do know that isn't what I want, and I will probably soon stop coming here at all soon.

What can you do to change it? Make good FPPs and comments, is all. Even that will probably not be enough, but really, this place has become an entity of it's own and any real changes will make a new MeFi, not the old one you like. Things change.

By: cortex

cortex — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:25:03 -0800

I don't think the Wright thread is going downhill fast. I think it had some early bumps, and will almost certainly have some more bumps given the high passions and hot tempers around here related to the electoral context that prompted it, but in general it's a well-put-together post and nobody has flipped their shit or anything. Heated but not stupid, discussion including Obama context but not solely about it or diverted to electionfilter. I still have high hopes for it.

On the other hand, that cop thread sucks in the way that an awful lot of cop threads on the blue suck, and I regret not just jumping off the fence and deleting it when I woke up this morning. There's rarely much to do in them other than rehash the same cops-are-pigs, not-all-cops-are-pigs, ooh-apoligist-much, say-that-next-time-you-get-mugged type arguments that come up every single time, and this post in particular was not some superlative thing that brought something really worthy or unusual to the topic.

If I had to pin down where I think I agree with some of your statement here, scrump, I'd say it's that early, noisy commenting, and early fight-starting comments, are a real pain in the ass on the blue and that finding a way to move away from that somewhat would be nice. I think we've been a little more willing to delete the occasional over-the-line noise in the blue, especially early comments, when we can catch them early enough to avoid a derail, but it's a challenge in hot-button threads.

Whether and what balance of deletions and timeouts and simply (if time-consumingly) corresponding directly with repeat noise-makers might help with some of this is a question we're constantly examining; short of some drastic change (something I'm not going to speculate on by myself, it's the sort of thing Matt and Jess and I are most likely to disagree on so I don't want to speak for them), that's probably the most direct route we have for dealing with some of this stuff.

I took the kind of proactive gamble of tossing a comment in the Wright thread (as scrump, on preview, has noted) expressing a desire to see it not go over to more Obama/Clinton/election infighting (which is what I see as the biggest threat to that thread, and which is what the early noise mostly has to do with), and we'll see if that helps; as a case-study in practically addressing some of the noise/discourse stuff that happens in these threads, that sort of thing is probably a more realistic model than a hard signup shutoff or a hardcore timeout ultimatum.

By: lunit

lunit — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:25:26 -0800

I still don't get it about the Wright thread. I've been watching it since the beginning, and I think it's actually going really well. There's even less snark than usual. To my knowledge, the mods haven't deleted anything yet.

Where is the derail into Obama/Clinton debating? I see some discussion of Wright's claims about AIDS, but that's a perfectly relevant concern/conversation considering that Wright is the subject of the post. I hope it doesn't derail into insults, but just becuase you think it might happen, doesn't mean it is happening.

All that aside, I, too, would love to see less name-calling and more debating.

By: LeeJay

LeeJay — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:25:36 -0800

Ehhh, I don't think it's worse. There are just more members now so it's a little louder and the snark is a little more frequent. I do get a little tired of it every now and then and that's when I take a little break from the site for a while. Trust me, spend some time on some other community sites and then come back and tell me that Metafilter isn't operating on a MUCH higher level than most, conversation-wise. We actually do a pretty good job most of the time. It's just a little harder to see when you're in the middle of it all.

Like you said, this came about because you found yourself getting more heated than you think was warranted. I get like that too. That's when I know that it might be time to take a few days off. Not saying that's what you should do and I'm not trying to dismiss your complaints. It's just that sometimes we all get caught up in issues that we take very personally and it leaves us with a bad taste in our mouths and we let that color the way we see the site as a whole, which might not be entirely fair or accurate.

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:27:58 -0800

I've been owning this lawn since long before you started standing on it!
posted by ND¢ at 4:18 PM on March 26

Ooo, wait!

*ahem cough cough ahem*

Abite hortibus meis, iuvenci scelerati!

How was that? Was that good? Did I say it right?

By: lunit

lunit — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:28:01 -0800

I mean, the derail into Obama/Clinton following cortex's warning, that is.

By: Dave Faris

Dave Faris — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:28:26 -0800

I've been lamenting recently how the front page has really become a haven for haterz. I'm sure it was ever thus, and I'm sure I've done more than my fair share, but it has begun to annoy me lately.

A week or so ago, there was a thread about James Taylor turning 60. Half of the comments in the thread that followed were basically about how much the guy sucks. I thought it was pretty uncalled for.

I can't help but feel like Metafilter has attracted all the fat little kids who don't like anything their mom put on their plates, and learned that it was ok to loudly complain about it. But I am at a total loss on what can be done about it.

By: yeti

yeti — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:32:42 -0800

If we closed registration then we'd never have a Jill Sobule to call our own.

By: Miko

Miko — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:32:48 -0800

Is MetaFilter going downhill again? Awesome. That matches the approximately 200 times someone else, at another time, has complained it's going downhill. Check the archives - it's been going downhill since it started!

One day I'm going to do a compendium of links to "MetaFilter's Going Downhill!" posts.

By: danb

danb — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:33:06 -0800

Well, really, they're not even close -- my comment was meant as good-natured joking around, and I figure that's true of the others as well. No offense, but if this is your idea of "lowering the discourse," the discourse must be quite low in your eyes pretty much all the time.

Oh, of course it was. I don't think anyone was being malicious, but it's still noise, good-natured or not.

Actual malice, like ad hominem attacks, are a different beast. Those are of course much rarer (although they do seem to be increasing, as scrump points out). The thing is, when someone is that far over the line, it's much easier for the mods give someone a timeout or a ban. The gradual accumulation of noise -- jokey comments and the like -- are, in my eyes, the bigger problem.

By: 23skidoo

23skidoo — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:33:34 -0800

I'm gonna take one right on the chin here and complain that MetaFilter just ain't what it used to be. I'm an idealist, and harbor the hope that maybe we can actually discuss the problem. HAHA. No, seriously.

Anyway, take the time to read the Jeremiah Wright thread. Then take the time to read the NYPD thread. Both recent, both charged topics, and both threads going downhill fast.

As an experiment, go back through the archives. Choose two posts from each year. One should be a post about something political that was current at the time. One should be a post about a hot button topic, like bad cops.

I'd bet dollars to donuts that as a rule of thumb, threads like that approach complete shit regardless of what year they are posted.

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:34:34 -0800

Half of the comments in the thread that followed were basically about how much the guy sucks. I thought it was pretty uncalled for.

Yeah, now that you mention it, I do remember that. I don't think a solution is to proactively post a comment early on instructing people to keep it civil, because that invites the thread to turn into a discussion about you asking them to do that.

But I think if a few people spoke up and said "Hey, so-and-so who said "he sucks!" this thread isn't for that. Unless you want to offer a more objective or salient critique, keep peanut gallery commentary to a minimum."

Here's my view - any kind of action that requires the mods to do anything else is a non-starter. You, me, all of us are in the community. And the community is a lot larger than it used to be which means lower exposure for asshats. So it's up to us to police the thread. I actually do believe that if things are spiraling out of control, and one or two people other than the original poster chastise misbehavers for misbehaving, I think it will stop, at least in that thread.

By: konolia

konolia — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:34:40 -0800

Periodically, we get a metatalk post that is the equivalent of Chicken Little saying the sky is falling.

Folks, the sky has been falling ever since this place first existed. There's just more of us here, is all. In all honesty, I think the place is in general MORE civil than it used to be. It's just that certain topics are a bit more volatile than others.

It is what it is, people. You don't like it, then I suggest you design and implement your own site. I'm serious. This is Matt's sandbox, and it runs pretty much how he wants it, usually. If somebody throws sand in someone else's eyes occasionally, it's the price we pay for having a place to dig.

By: Tehanu

Tehanu — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:36:18 -0800

This is the same bullshit Meta thread that comes up at least once a year.

I've only been a member about a year, plus some time lurking before that, and I'm pretty sure I've seen several MeTa threads on this in that time. Or maybe that was threads that became this discussion after a certain number of comments.

We're just passengers.

I think the crux of the issue begins hereabouts. You really think this is true? I think your vision of MetaFilter may differ from many people here.

They made a bus. We get grab the wheel and drive it places sometimes. Sometimes to cracked.com. But then Artw threatens to throw anyone doing so in the future out of the bus and run them over with it. So do that with extreme caution. We do seem to make regular trips to Obamaland lately. I hear it's like the new Gettysburg.

By: nanojath

nanojath — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:37:06 -0800

It's like we've collectively decided that, fuck it, everyone else is behaving badly, I will too. And I'll freely confess that one of the things that made me post this today is that I wrote "go fuck yourself" in a comment on the blue. Big WTF moment, you might say: for some reason, my personal barometer for what was an acceptable level of discourse on the Blue had slipped to the point where I felt like it was okay to write that, and have it sit there.

I've got a better solution for this than a big long MetaTalk rant. Work on your personal barometer, because this is the only area in which the individual user can rationally influence the nature of the site. Blaming your outbreak of bad personal behavior on the site going downhill is really pretty B.S.

By: cog_nate

cog_nate — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:38:31 -0800

Vision Statement (DRAFT): Acting proactively, Metafilter Network LLC (hereafter know as "the site") will take an active role in promoting active accretion and posticulation to the site of Other Internet Sites of Interest (OISoI) by active members of the site in accordance with the site's values.

Values (DRAFT):
* Hugs are an intrinsic necessity to human beings
* Pancakes (aka crepes, crumpets, flapjacks, etc.) are sweet flatbreads typically cooked on a hot griddle, and solely that
* Legumes are to be ruminated upon at length
* Hands are for shaking, masturbating, clicking, typing, and many other activities; not for cutting off
* SCIENCE!

By: delmoi

delmoi — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:38:31 -0800

Yeah... I don't really notice anything. I know there was a significant improvement a couple years back (around the time Dhoyt got banned, IIRC) and since then then it's been pretty constant.

One thing we do have is a lot more people so threads fill up quickly. But I just don't think that there is much degradation overall. It ebbs and flows and it may be that you joined during an overall lull?

By: Miko

Miko — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:38:31 -0800

Historians even have a term for the perennial idea that everything's going to hell in a handbasket. It's called a "decline narrative." In a few more years, this gets to be "the good old days."

By: Dave Faris

Dave Faris — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:38:34 -0800

I'd bet dollars to donuts

Careful. Cortex is a sucker for those kinds of bets, and as they say, the house has all the advantage.

By: 1

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:38:55 -0800

This post made me laugh out loud at work.

By: timeistight

timeistight — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:38:58 -0800

scrump: Here are two tips for MetaFilter happiness:

Stay out of any threads on American politics
Stay out of any threads that might attract American politicos

Americans are lovely, lovely people, but politics makes them nuts.

By: The Light Fantastic

The Light Fantastic — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:39:06 -0800

I think someone needs to take a firm stand on what the vision of MetaFilter is

And I'm guessing you've nominated yourself? What's your stand on cracked.com?

By: Divine_Wino

Divine_Wino — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:40:41 -0800

Sandboxes are public restrooms for cats, which is fine by me.

By: jeblis

jeblis — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:43:04 -0800

Kids these days. In my day we were respectful of our elders, only spoke when talked to, we were smarter.

Get off my lawn!

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:48:45 -0800

Regarding "going downhill" -- check out this awesome downhill Line Rider [high-res version].

By: iamkimiam

iamkimiam — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:49:19 -0800

Who peed in *your* popcorn Scrump?

Seriously, I am relatively new here, but I think that who I am and what I add is AWESOME. And that goes for most everybody else. If you don't like the general attitude here, become a changer or a cheerleeder. Calling out EVERYBODY though? What do you want us to do? Calling out Matt personally as well? Are things going to change if Matt prepares the most awesome mission statement in the world? The whole damn site is the mission statement. And I'm still trying to read all of it.

By: yhbc

yhbc — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:51:28 -0800

Someone should probably mention that the phrase "Best of the Web" has never appeared on the front page, logo, welcome to new members page, guidelines page, "what makes a good post" page, or anywhere else on the site.

Sure, it's all over the meeting minutes of the cabal, but, well - you know.

By: waraw

waraw — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:51:35 -0800

Once again I will take the blame here. I still contend they had it coming.

By: Tehanu

Tehanu — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:53:33 -0800

One day I'm going to do a compendium of links to "MetaFilter's Going Downhill!" posts.

It should go on the wiki. If we are going to hell in a handbasket, we should document it in glorious detail for the digital anthropologists. Someone could base a thesis on it. "The Collapse of an Online Civilization: Or How Metafilter Was The Rome Of The Internet Until The Lolcats Came."

By: Meatbomb

Meatbomb — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:56:12 -0800

I think someone needs to take a firm stand on what the vision of MetaFilter is

And I'm guessing you've nominated yourself?

I nominate Aaron A. Aaronson. He's good with that vision thing.

By: never used baby shoes

never used baby shoes — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:57:04 -0800

I can't speak as to whether or not MeFi is "going downhill" at the moment; as a 58ker, I'm often not certain what my ability is to speak to the site, its history, and its policies, because I just don't have the knowledge.

I do know the only way to do anything about it is to look at my own behaviour, and I am trying to do less snark/jokes in the Blue, especially since jessamyn pointed a comment at me last week. Not a callout, not anything mean, but it grabbed my attention and made me look at how I'm posting, what I'm saying, and perhaps most importantly, why I feel it necessary to say anything. In the end, that's all I can do - we can have this discussion as many times as we want, but we each control our keyboards. Our mods do a great job, with a deft touch, but they cannot control us all, all the time. We aren't passengers on the website, but the content providers - maybe that's what we need to remember.

I don't know how we make everyone take that extra moment of pause before fingers hit the keyboard. Maybe we need to disable publicizing favorites, maybe not...but I think we all need to sometimes look at what we are about to post, and ask if it is worth it.

By: dhammond

dhammond — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:58:36 -0800

I try to avoid political discussions (with varying success) as much as possible. Too much nastiness and very little perspective.

By: cortex

cortex — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:58:52 -0800

the house has all the advantage

This is known sometimes as "the vig", and generally is represented as strips of crispy bacon nestled into the maple frosting that is the laws of probability.

One day I'm going to do a compendium of links to "MetaFilter's Going Downhill!" posts.

GET OUT OF MY MIND

By: psmealey

psmealey — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:01:38 -0800

I, for one, am very disappointed that MetaFilter is diverging from what I, personally, think it should be. Will someone please step in an fix this for me?

The James Taylor thing was tame. But, if you love James Taylor, why do you care if some anonymous person thinks that he sucks? If you met such a person at work or in a bar, you'd probably just ignore them. Why is that so difficult here?

Also, you suck at liking music, if you like James Taylor.

For my own part, I love it when people mix it up in political threads. Some of my favorite threads here have been throw-downs between MidasMulligan, Amberglow, DavidDark, Hama7, Mayor Curley and others who are polar opposites of the political spectrum. I know a lot of people hate electionfilter, but it's some of the best stuff on the web as far as I'm concerned. I mean, at least people have well thought out viewpoints, and aren't afraid to back them up here. If you want to see LAME POLITICSFILTER, go check out what the dumbasses are posting to the comments section at CNN.

What does get annoying, though, is when you spot someone being disingenuous, or merely parroting party talking points. This often seems like an attempt rile people up rather than engage in (sometimes intense) debate. Though, I have been wrong about that... I have called people out for trolling when they were being sincere, so I guess everyone should get a break.

By: scrump

scrump — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:08:29 -0800

Some of my favorite threads here have been throw-downs between MidasMulligan, Amberglow, DavidDark, Hama7, Mayor Curley and others who are polar opposites of the political spectrum.

Maybe that's the disconnect: what you described is what I tend to see as the ne plus ultra worst of MetaFilter, on a regular basis. And there appears to be a roughly equal cohort of people who love that stuff and people who hate that stuff.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:09:22 -0800

Were a bunch of comments deleted in those threads? They seem pretty civil to me, even if there's some disagreement in 'em.

By: deern the headlice

deern the headlice — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:10:24 -0800

I enjoy some of the links posted to the front page of MeFi, but the comments section has never seemed worth reading -- no offense to any of you personally.

I try to avoid political discussions (with varying success) as much as possible. Too much nastiness and very little perspective.

Also, what he said.

By: Miko

Miko — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:12:31 -0800

there appears to be a roughly equal cohort of people who love that stuff and people who hate that stuff.

Good thing there's more than one post a day, so we can read the ones we like the best.

By: Greg Nog

Greg Nog — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:15:06 -0800

Just the other day, actually, I was thinking about how much lovlier the arguments are here now that a couple of really vitriolic noise-spewers are gone (whose names shall remain unspoken). It seems like there was a certain kind of "I am RIGHT about this and you are DELUDED" tone that was thrown around a lot more back when I was lurking. Overall, metafilter seems even nicer than when I first joined. I dunno, though; it may just be a side effect of having people like Miko as a contact, and always being delighted by their contributions as they pop up on the side of my frontpage.

scrump: I suggest you add Miko as a contact. It's like a pegasus holding a bucket of sunshine galloping into your internet.

By: blue_beetle

blue_beetle — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:17:23 -0800

Q: WHAT DO YOU WANT?
M: Well, I was told outside that...
Q: Don't give me that, you snotty-faced heap of parrot droppings!
M: What?
Q: Shut your festering gob, you tit! Your type really makes me puke, you vacuous, coffee-nosed, maloderous, pervert!!!
M: Look, I CAME HERE FOR AN ARGUMENT, I'm not going to just stand...!!
Q: OH, oh I'm sorry, but this is abuse.
M: Oh, I see, well, that explains it.
Q: Ah yes, you want room 12A, Just along the corridor.
M: Oh, Thank you very much. Sorry.
Q: Not at all.
M: Thank You.
(Under his breath) Stupid git!!

By: wendell

wendell — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:17:46 -0800

Americans are lovely, lovely people, but politics makes them nuts.
And the waning days of the Bush Mis-administration with all of its hottest-button issues totally unresolved and the Longest Presidential Campaign in American History (7 MORE MONTHS TO GO) are causing record high levels of American Nutsiness. The infusion of LolCats, RickRolling and any other silly memes not featuring One Cup can only help relieve the strain.

In fact, LOOK WHO'S ATTENDING (and panelling) THE FIRST EVER ROFLCOM! I'm sure he'll come back with lots of inspiration about what to do and what NOT to do here (first clue: making me wear Tron Guy's costume is a NOT)

There also is the increasing rarity of High-Brow Culture Links (which may reflect an increasing rarity of High-Brow Culture on the Web) and the ever-multiplying SEO-head Spammonsters penetrating our community defenses, even though their chance of survival here is nil.

All trends making 2008 a DIFFICULT year for the True Spirit of MetaFilter.

I expect that after the oncoming economic disaster takes out a lot of the tall trees on the Web, MeFi will be as steady and strong as ever (and the chastening of the Economic Optimists won't hurt).

By: Marie Mon Dieu

Marie Mon Dieu — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:17:57 -0800

Yeah, I hear you and I really see your point of view. I read a few comments but I am cooking supper so I can't read all of them right now (but I will later).

Honestly, I'm rather nonplussed after just listening to the stupendously fantastico woundrously great podcast, and seeing all the other great posts here day in and day out, put up by people who are giving their time for FREE in order that YOU might benefit from reading said posts, all of which you have the CHOICE whether or not to READ or not. I think the site should be fluid and the mods do a great job of keeping it fluid, given the multitude of fish posting here.

I recently coughed up the fin to join here, but I've been reading this site since its inception, since they didn't have the option to join. Metafilter was my window to the outside world when I was agoraphobic and living with an abusive asshole. I learned about the outside world through reading Metafilter. I am not a freak, I am just a regular person who went through bad times and happened upon this site through websurfing and realized there were other intelligent people out there and I felt connected to the world by reading this site. I am a Great-Auntie of Metafilter, and I am here to tell you: it is fine the way it is, and the users do a GREAT job of keeping it in line. It is the epitome of freedom of speech, and given the freedom that Matt, Jessamyn, Cortex and PB, et al, allow, I say:

You have the right to your opinion.

Opinions are like assholes.

Everyone has an asshole.

And yes, I did get an 'A' in Logic,.

By: maxwelton

maxwelton — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:18:26 -0800

Do people really not like the occasional zinger in a thread? My favorite discussions are those that have a nice combination of debate, information, humor and personal anecdote.

Not that anyone gives two shits, but if every discussion was a dry discussion of the item(s) linked, I'd only check in every couple of weeks.

You know what's really gone downhill? Well, let's just say I have to wear underwire briefs.

By: ND¢

ND¢ — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:18:35 -0800

Were a bunch of comments deleted in those threads?

Metafilter's own James Taylor showed up in both of them, still drunk from his birthday party, and told a bunch of people to fuck off, but he did it in a unique bittersweet folk rock kind of way. I liked it, but then I suck at liking comments.

By: Miko

Miko — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:18:46 -0800

I, too, like PoliticsFilter, by the way. I think it can go overboard, I think it can get heated, and I think too much if it is a bad thing. But, in balance with the rest of the postings, it's of equal quality. Certainly it's the only place on the internet I'd ever be interested in talking politics. When you compare politics posts with other current events posts, they're on a par. And I personally think they have more merit and are more interesting than technology posts, for instance, but I'm not about to take up arms against TechFilter. I just don't read that stuff. PoliticsFilter, in proper doses, is one of the things that makes this a good site, to me.

I understand they may be harder to moderate - and that's harder for me to know. If they are a more significant drain on the moderating than other parts of the site, that might be a concern. But it seems to me that, em, almost any innocent subject can implode given the right set of personalities.

By: By The Grace of God

By The Grace of God — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:19:36 -0800

well, the world is nasty and has little perspective. Five year olds are sold into prostitution and children have to leave their villages at night to avoid being kidnapped by armies. The powerful wish to prevent this nastiness probably provokes the nastiness of political threads.

Maybe if I avoided politics I'd be less depressed, but you know what I'd rather be depressed for the rest of my life than avoid engaging with what's going on in the world.

By: Armitage Shanks

Armitage Shanks — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:21:27 -0800

But, if you love James Taylor, why do you care if some anonymous person thinks that he sucks? If you met such a person at work or in a bar, you'd probably just ignore them. Why is that so difficult here?

Because it was a post about James Taylor, where people who like James Taylor naively expected a discussion within the context of people who like James Taylor? If you went to, say an Alfred Hitchcock retrospective at your local movie theater, and half the audience was people shouting ALFRED HITCHCOCK SUCKS!, would you just ignore them and enjoy the movie? [NOT JAMESTAYLORIST]

By: psmealey

psmealey — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:25:32 -0800

No, I wouldn't Mr. Shanks, just hoping you could answer that question for me, as it bothers me too, and I have difficulty laying off the bait.

By: misha

misha — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:27:23 -0800

This post made me do a double-take, because I was going to post here:

WOW! This is truly Best of the Web day!

Ceiling cats, automatons, robots...I LOVE the blue today!

By: Free word order!

Free word order! — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:28:26 -0800

And there appears to be a roughly equal cohort of people who love that stuff and people who hate that stuff.

Let love win.

By: dios

dios — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:31:56 -0800

From last month.

By: Armitage Shanks

Armitage Shanks — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:34:51 -0800

No, I wouldn't Mr. Shanks, just hoping you could answer that question for me, as it bothers me too, and I have difficulty laying off the bait.

Ah, sorry, I thought you were being rhetorical. I'm not sure most people can be expected to lay off the bait without avoiding the discussion altogether, which is rather disappointing when it's about someone you actually like.

By: CunningLinguist

CunningLinguist — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:36:24 -0800

From June 2000: The death of Metafilter.

Best part: "the site has been going downhill since it got to user #450 or so."

By: justgary

justgary — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:38:02 -0800

More people more noise. You can't stop it, you can only hope to contain it.

It is what it is, people. You don't like it, then I suggest you design and implement your own site. I'm serious. This is Matt's sandbox, and it runs pretty much how he wants it, usually.

Ironic comments from someone that complained about metafilter recently, left in a huff forever, and then came back a week later. You might want to take your own advice next time.

By: Dave Faris

Dave Faris — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:46:48 -0800

why do you care if some anonymous person thinks that he sucks?

Actually, I don't. I used that as an example of how the discourse around here sometimes devolves into who hates something the most, and that it feeds on itself. It's true. I couldn't care less of some 20 year old social drop out doesn't like something. The question is, why, is it important for them to post that insignificant piece of brain turd on a website?

By: Brandon Blatcher

Brandon Blatcher — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:52:09 -0800

Why is MetaFilter going downhill, and what are we going to do about it?

You round up the Anderson boys and I'll go get the McGraws and we'll up on the north ridge. We got some snipe huntin' to do.

By: Navelgazer

Navelgazer — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:53:54 -0800

Okay wow. I authored the James Taylor post, and I have to agree with psmealy - the thread was pretty tame, I thought. I appreciate Dave Faris and Pastabagel for their comments, but I expected much more snark, and most of what it got was people debating his merit, pretty respectfully for the most part. I expected much worse, and that might be the problem.

I think MeFi is far from broken, and spend more time on it recently than ever before (I'm a 38ker, so that might not mean much) but I think there's still some truth to what scrump is talking about. While the shrillest voices have moved into history, the overall debate has sunk ever-so-slightly. My only frame of reference is my own experience, so I'm sorry if the rest of this is too myopic, but anyway...

Some of my first comments here were in debates about desriptivism/prescriptivism and the dearth of female philosophers, and in both I took up unpopular opinions, and got into extended arguments, but that's what they were - arguments. Not attacks. Things got heated, to be sure, but the heat was spent on clarifying opinions and trying to convince, not on shutting down the member who disagreed. If anything, it was all about asking for more input. I haven't seen that around nearly as much recently.

That's still not the biggest issue, for me, however. Nor is the "noise" in threads, even on AskMe. I personally love the noise, but I need to admit that what I love about the site, and what I sometimes emphasize too much in my FPP's, is the discussion that results from the posts, far more than the original content of the posts themselves. I know that this goes counter to what Matt wishes for in the site, and while we do all get our turns at the steering wheel, it's still Matt's bus, so I try now (with mixed results) to keep my FPP content as quality as I can. I'm still mainly here for the discussion though, and something about that has gone massively awry.

When I was first lurking, and when I first joined, the first ten comments on any given FPP would generally be reactions to the content of the post, or questions raised by it, which would then generate the rest of the conversation. Now it seems like every thread starts with talk and snark about the quality of the post itself, and whether it'll be deleted or not. I realize that the mods are having to spend all waking hours dealing with SEO Spammers and combined with the seeming influx of new members in 2008, plus the rash of flameouts last month, that can't be easy. Just paying attention to yesterdays contributions, deletion must have felt almost like playing a shoot-em-up. There seems to be a lot more focus on moderating the quality of the content, which is good, except that it leads to a lot of paranoia about posting (see this MeTa from yesterday) and an emphasis on users away from constructive enjoyment of the site to constant judgment over the quality of the site. This is damaging.

Not every thread is going to appeal to every member. I understand the need to keep up quality, which is why I'm not bitching about Cracked.com posts being deleted, even though I generally enjoy them. For the most part, they probably don't belong here. Still, I know that if an FPP is about, say, particle physics or wine-making, I probably won't find much of interest, and don't join in. Instead I look for the John Hughes or Southpark links. I simply cannot understand the impetus to look into every thread and shit in all of the ones which weren't built for you personally (not speaking of anyone personally) when the site just can't work that way. If it's just not your flavor of tea, move on. If it's truly offensive, flag it and move on.

But I don't see what Matt, Jess, Cortex or pb can do that they aren't doing already, and doing a great job of.

By: Jofus

Jofus — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:54:47 -0800

I've been here longer than most of you. I've been reading the site pretty much every day. My opinion in this matter is therefore not without some weight:

Metafilter is not going downhill.

By: Marie Mon Dieu

Marie Mon Dieu — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:59:20 -0800

Maxwelton said: Do people really not like the occasional zinger in a thread? My favorite discussions are those that have a nice combination of debate, information, humor and personal anecdote.

I like it. I picture a group of very intelligent people, sitting around in a room, firing off comments to each other. The thing is, when people are in person, they see other people's faces and hear their tone of voice.

If you read and follow this site long enough, you pick up on each person's individual tone of voice -- also, I think that a lot of folk here are into philosophy and collegiate type stuff, meaning they talk in that debate-y style that other people might be put off by. My dad is a PhD in education so we fling barbs/quotes/poetry, etc. back and forth with no problem and with good humor. My aunts as well. Very old school New England sharpish, but not meant in a nasty sort of way. More like verbal basketball.

Football fans might find it a bit slow, however.

By: Marie Mon Dieu

Marie Mon Dieu — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:01:02 -0800

slow = fast, I mean, I'm watching my green beans for chrissake!

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:03:37 -0800

Politics poisons the site.

No, politics do not poison the site. Rather, thoughtlessly lazy, throwaway comments and deliberately divisive comments are what poison the site.

LarryC, I don't mean to single you out or to give offense, honest, but your comment in the NYPD thread was, to my mind, the very kind of input that demonstrates this problem. Jessamyn's comment in that thread was also, at least partially, though probably not intentionally, an attempt to lump people together for the purpose of lazy aspersion, which is ironic given that is the reason for which many contentious threads are deleted (e.g, "lolxtians" etc.).

There are a couple other infamous users who play this rhetorical trick, to deliberately ruin a discussion about a subject matter they would prefer not be discussed, because it runs counter to their own economic, social, sexual, religious or political views. It is thread shitting, which is what is really poisonous, and whether the thread is political or not is irrelevant.

The ones who cannot handle the content of a thread, be it political in nature, or of any other nature, should just learn to control themselves and stay out of that thread. You're hurting Metafilter when you take a dump in a thread. It's hard, I know this personally, but it can be done.

By: languagehat

languagehat — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:05:23 -0800

And I'll freely confess that one of the things that made me post this today is that I wrote "go fuck yourself" in a comment on the blue. Big WTF moment, you might say: for some reason, my personal barometer for what was an acceptable level of discourse on the Blue had slipped to the point where I felt like it was okay to write that, and have it sit there.

Then I suggest you tend to the beam in your own eye and spare us the thousand-and-first "OMG MeFi Is Going to Hell!!!" post.

As for that problem - respectfully, I just don't see it. I still think this is a wonderful place.

Same here. I was just thinking recently how much better it is than it was a year or two ago. I'd name some of the excellent people who have joined and made consistently good contributions, but I'm afraid I'd leave some of them out. There's heavy breathing and the occasional burst of flame in political threads? Yup. Skip 'em or ignore the bad stuff or flag it and move on; if something is especially nasty, write the admins about it, and it will be dealt with. But that problem has always been there and always will; if you want flowers and incense and everyone holding hands, hoo boy, have you come to the wrong place. Which reminds me:

Because it was a post about James Taylor, where people who like James Taylor naively expected a discussion within the context of people who like James Taylor?

You want the James Taylor Fan Club site, not MetaFilter. We snark here. Yes, even in "your favorite lame folkrocker turned 60!" threads.

By: ten pounds of inedita

ten pounds of inedita — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:06:46 -0800

There are some hot-button discussions that inevtaibly attract personal attacks and flames: cops, atheism, vegetarianism, Iraq, and so on. There are some long-time users who attract enough respect from other long-time users that their idiotic, rant, insult- and attack-filled screeds are almost never flagged or deleted and they themselves are never punished. The moderators are imperfect creatures and kill many comments that should live and let live many comments that should die.

It's been the same way for years, it's no worse now than it was then, and I deal with it in my own ways. For example, I spend more time on other sites where there are fewer cults of personality and it's harder for long-time users to get away with crap.

This isn't my first MeFi account, and it won't be my last. I think the community is often better served by semi-anonymous discussion. If you want to make friendies, there's always MetaChat.

I try not to treat with trolls, but I am human. I just finished a pointless fight with a notorious asshole whom I had given the benefit of the doubt one too many times. That is, once. If more people would simply let the worst offenders rage and wank impotently in their cages, the place would be cleaner.

I favourite comments that deserve it, not comments that are merely funny. But, yeah, visible faves and visible fave totals on user pages are Not Good. They serve no purpose other than to encourage people to get more faves, and they can do so by means that are not beneficial to the site: one-liners, attacking unpopular ideas or people, etc.

(And to avoid the perception of hypocrisy, I've had three of my own comments deleted in the last month. One shouldn't have been, one should have been, and the other was a judgment call.)

By: Dave Faris

Dave Faris — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:09:55 -0800

why is it important for them to post that insignificant piece of brain turd on a website?

(That was a rhetorical question, I should add, as I've left my own fair share of turds here.)

By: pineapple

pineapple — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:11:54 -0800

[NOT HERMITOSIS-IST] said: "fluctuations in ph are just MetaFilter's way of cleaning and regulating itself."

Yes, MetaFilter can cleanse itself naturally, and shouldn't be made to feel like it needs some sort of vinegar rinse with a powder-fresh cologne bath after. A healthy MetaFilter will naturally have different ebbs, flows, and scents, and this is normal.

agregoli said: "Some of the rudeness here I absolutely do not get. Attack my argument, fine, but insults against my personal feelings or me as a person are just rude and pointless and make me leave a thread these days. If you have so little respect for the person you're arguing with as to insult them because of their opinions, you're not worth talking to about that subject. And I see this happening to a lot of people lately."

As someone who was recently in a thread that you left, what I saw was you saying, "My feelings are my whole argument, and therefore since no one can call my feelings wrong, you aren't entitled to address my argument, either." And I really didn't see it as anyone insulting you, or being disrespectful or rude. What did I see was people saying, "Hey, agregoli, that angle isn't a very fair one to take, and I'm not actually attacking you." And in that thread in particular, you seemed to be having a pretty personal reaction to the topic.

So, while maybe this is happening to a lot of people lately, from my own experience, it's not exactly happening in the way you're describing it here.

And the point of that observation is merely to say that just because yet one more person says, "MetaFilter sucks for reason [whatever]" doesn't actually make it a trend -- but equally as likely something informed by one's personal situation or predilections for a certain kind of discourse.

Dave Faris said: "A week or so ago, there was a thread about James Taylor turning 60. Half of the comments in the thread that followed were basically about how much the guy sucks. I thought it was pretty uncalled for."

Wait. Are you really saying that "your favorite band sucks" = "the hate is out of control around here"? I'm not being facetious. Also, I didn't see this James Taylor thread, but I have a hard time getting on board the idea that Your Favorite Balladeer Has a Birthday is somehow Best of the Web.

James Taylor's Biggest Fan, Who is Totally Objective, For Reals said: "I couldn't care less of some 20 year old social drop out doesn't like something. The question is, why, is it important for them to post that insignificant piece of brain turd on a website?"

Seriously. All this for James Taylor's birthday thread. Methinks he doth protest too much.

waraw said: "Once again I will take the blame here. I still contend they had it coming."

Arbitrarily flagged.

By: mullingitover

mullingitover — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:13:21 -0800

Scrump: "I used to be able to point people here and assume that it was self-evident that MetaFilter was of a higher quality, just from a cursory read. That's no longer the case."

Did you not see this page, or are you intentionally not factoring it in just to make your point?

By: Jofus

Jofus — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:13:58 -0800

Can't you see that James Taylor IS TEARING US APART?!!?

By: klarck

klarck — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:16:34 -0800

Agreed! If Metafilter continues to deteriorate at this pace, I'll have to remove it from my bookmarks in another 25 years.

By: cortex

cortex — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:17:23 -0800

Jessamyn's comment in that thread was also, at least partially, though probably not intentionally, an attempt to lump people together for the purpose of lazy aspersion, which is ironic given that is the reason for which many contentious threads are deleted (e.g, "lolxtians" etc.).

I haven't been reading the cop thread in detail, so I just went back to check this out. I'm actually a little boggled at the strident reaction her comments got; they seemed pretty mild and spot-on besides as far as the kind of dynamic that appears time and time again in those threads. Very smart, very perceptive posters seem to really switch into a more black-and-white, with-us-or-against-us kind of mode about this issue in a way that always kind of drives me crazy when I see it happening, and I don't know what to chalk the reaction to her comments up to other than the issue itself being so heated and divisive that smart and otherwise pretty reasonable people stop being able to accept critical examination of their own in-thread behavior.

My reading is no doubt biased by some co-moderator sympathy and my personal weariness at what seems to be among the most acrimonious and repetitive topics of discussion Mefi's ever addressed, so take the above as a personal reaction and not an attempt to condemn any individual or the group of commenters as a whole. But looking at it, I'm seeing bad dynamic -> valid critique of bad dynamic -> escalated, turn-on-your-own overreaction to critique.

And I understand that the fact that the folks who were complaining about her comments feel or felt totally in the right about their reactions to her is a testament to the heatedness of the topic and the emotional investment people have in it, but it really does read kind of like bizarro-world to me.

By: Dave Faris

Dave Faris — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:23:13 -0800

Surely you guys can tell the difference between citing an example and making a full-blown call-out, can't you?

By: Marie Mon Dieu

Marie Mon Dieu — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:24:09 -0800

Can't you see that James Taylor IS TEARING US APART?!!?

I saw James Taylor in concert, but I thought of Zimbo, by Echo and the Bunnyman, when I saw this post.

And I think James Taylor is a whiney little bitch after giving up Carly Simon, btw. He's so vain and she is not.

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:25:54 -0800

But looking at it, I'm seeing bad dynamic -> valid critique of bad dynamic -> escalated, turn-on-your-own overreaction to critique.

To be fair, I wasn't the only one who saw faulty premises being used to lump everyone in the thread together with an offensive view. That lumping was unhelpful, to say the least, and it's unfortunate -- though understandable given the subject -- that it is now called an "overreaction" to point out why that's unhelpful.

By: 23skidoo

23skidoo — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:26:27 -0800

Surely you guys can tell the difference between citing an example and making a full-blown call-out, can't you?

Maybe it was a really poor example. Not as bad as James Taylor, but pretty bad nonetheless.

By: peacay

peacay — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:27:12 -0800

--More people more noise. You can't stop it, you can only hope to contain it.--

I would like to see a trial of there being a 15min comment free period following a post going on the front page. It's the initial rushed one-liners that frequently set the tone of the thread so *maybe* a time-gap would help reduce the autoresponders and also promote reading of the links. Sure, it's a big maybe but it would be interesting to see if there were any noticeable effects over, say, a one month period. Any downsides?

By: shmegegge

shmegegge — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:29:58 -0800

I haven't been reading the cop thread in detail, so I just went back to check this out. I'm actually a little boggled at the strident reaction her comments got; they seemed pretty mild and spot-on besides as far as the kind of dynamic that appears time and time again in those threads.

I'm actually a little boggled that you'd call the reactions against her comments strident. Then again, I was one of the people who responded to her, so maybe that's why. But in all truthiness, I firmly believe that the nypd thread is going really really well. There have been some remarkably good comments in there, and I haven't noticed too much name calling or anything. billyfleetwood has been making some remarkably savvy and well thought out comments and the very few people whose total point was "fuck tha police" seem to have left after their one comment. the people left discussing these things are not TOTALLY keeping their tempers in check, but their responses are still pretty civil and an actual discussion seems to be happening. in fact, I'm inclined to think the worst part of that thread is the part where people had to actually defend having a poor view of cops to Jessamyn because she was lumping all cop issues into the camp of irrational anti-cop hatred. Maybe she WAS spot-on in terms of what happens in those threads generally, but it wasn't really happening before she came in, and it managed not to happen despite her having come in. Further, if you can point me to an instance where a mod stepped in and openly criticized one side of a contentious argument before it got contentious in order to curtail it getting contentious and had it work, i'll go down on you.

By: Dave Faris

Dave Faris — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:33:34 -0800

I think it's interesting that for all the examples of places where people say things have supposedly gone wrong in threads, we can't even seem to agree that things have actually gone wrong.

By: pineapple

pineapple — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:35:22 -0800

peacay said: "I would like to see a trial of there being a 15min comment free period following a post going on the front page. It's the initial rushed one-liners that frequently set the tone of the thread so *maybe* a time-gap would help reduce the autoresponders and also promote reading of the links. Sure, it's a big maybe but it would be interesting to see if there were any noticeable effects over, say, a one month period. Any downsides?"

What would prevent people from simply rushing to be the first one-liners in after the time lockout expires? I'm not snarking, I really don't know.

By: robocop is bleeding

robocop is bleeding — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:35:41 -0800

I'm going to try to comment with a "Thanks for posting this!" in reply to posts that I enjoy. If enough people do that, then it gets a bit harder for the snark to get piled on. Yeah, I know this is what favorites can be used for, but given that people favorite for different reasons, it's nice to have the explicit positive feedback.

On the other hand, I'll just skip replying to threads that are not my cup of tea.

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:36:09 -0800

"They made a bus. We get grab the wheel and drive it places sometimes. Sometimes to cracked.com. But then Artw threatens to throw anyone doing so in the future ~~out of the bus and run them over with it~~." UNDER THE BUS.

Jesus, haven't you been paying any attention at all?

By: pineapple

pineapple — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:36:23 -0800

shmegegge said: "Further, if you can point me to an instance where a mod stepped in and openly criticized one side of a contentious argument before it got contentious in order to curtail it getting contentious and had it work, i'll go down on you."

Yeah, we're going to need pics.

By: Navelgazer

Navelgazer — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:41:36 -0800

Ahh, robocop is bleeding, you've always been one of my favorites.

By: Artw

Artw — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:42:09 -0800

I'm glad that someone has noted that I speak with a voice of utter authority and suggestions for site improvements that I make are inevitably going to be made, no matter how seemingly out of step with the Metafilter ethos, due to their water tight logic and the inescapable power of my persuasion.

The way some people talk you’d think a suggestion that we randomly ban people without warning was a no-hoper from the start.

By: quin

quin — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:42:22 -0800

I'm going to approach this from a slightly different angle; clearly scrump feels that MeFi has gone off the rails from it's original vision, or is in some way, not competing with other sites in terms of quality discussion or posts.

I think it has been well established that looking at MeFi history is quite revelatory when it comes to debasing people of the idea that there ever were 'halcyon days of yore' when no one argued and all the discourse was elevated through the rafters.

So if it's the other forums are better thing, I ask honestly: what other sites out there have the same number of posters and maintain the level of conversation typically seen in the blue?

Even when you account for the snark and one-liners (of which I am quite guilty), this place is still an oasis when it comes to clever writing and thoughtful opinions.

And when it's at it's absolute worst, Metafilter still almost never gets to the 'fuck you faggot' that places like the youtube forums view as a starting place.

Sure, there are times that I read something here that gets me angry. And yes, I have moments when I want to shout down people that I disagree with, but when that happens, I either take a deep breath and just walk away, or I wait until my blood has cooled enough that I won't be adding to the fire with my vitriol. I don't think I'm alone in this either. I've spent enough time on other forums to know that what we have here is great, warts and all.

By: Marie Mon Dieu

Marie Mon Dieu — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:42:32 -0800

I think it's interesting that for all the examples of places where people say things have supposedly gone wrong in threads, we can't even seem to agree that things have actually gone wrong.

The curse of the Irish, Dave Faris.

I'd pay you good money if you could solve this problem, man. So would a lot of people. But a very wise observation.

By: absalom

absalom — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:46:02 -0800

I agree, Robocop. I try to pop into really solid threads and give an attaboy. I guess, I could favorite, (IF FAVORITES WERE NOT FUCKING BOOKMARKS, AMIRITE???) but the really great mefi threads seem to have almost no discussion or, if I'm very lucky, two specialists on the topic who hash it out. It also helps me remind meself:

It's about the links, not the discussion.

By: KokuRyu

KokuRyu — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:46:22 -0800

Why is MetaFilter going downhill, and what are we going to do about it?

Why not focus your energy on creating a genuinely great, best-of-the-web FPP? Why not ignore politics/election/Iraq/LOLXIANS threads, which will inevitably devolve into trainwrecks?

Hand-wringing is not going to solve your problem, scrump. Just focus on your own actions and your own potential. And if another user is bugging you, well, that's what the "flag" button is for.

And snark is also helpful, too, in small, precise doses.

By: Tehanu

Tehanu — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:48:46 -0800

mr_crash_davis, is there a way to be run over by a bus without being under it? Also, I think, by definition, being under the bus is outside of the bus. But you're right, my wording could have been more precise there. All this bus imagery is getting complicated, and I forgot that bit from the other thread, dammit.

The way some people talk you’d think a suggestion that we randomly ban people without warning was a no-hoper from the start.

Nah. I thought your post was funny. Cracked.com usually annoys me too, but not on the same level. But the "OMG INSECT PHOTOS AND SCARY TEXT! I WILL NEVER LEAVE MY BEDROOM AGAIN" posts, from cracked.com or not, flip the same switch in my brain that cracked.com posts seem to flip in yours.

By: The Castle

The Castle — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:52:27 -0800

"I think it's interesting that for all the examples of places where people say things have supposedly gone wrong in threads, we can't even seem to agree that things have actually gone wrong."

I think this is a very good point, Dave. I totally agree with your point of why go into a James Taylor thread just to say you hate James Taylor. For me, it just makes a thread worse. Other posters see it as no big deal, or even a good thing. I'm not narrowminded enough to say this makes MetaFilter worse, but it does make me enjoy it less, as there seem to be more and more people who like that.

By: sgt.serenity

sgt.serenity — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:55:56 -0800

where's my fucking t shirt ?

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:05:04 -0800

"where's my fucking t shirt ?"

Right here, sgt.serenity.