nuts April 26, 2008 1:58 AM Subscribe
On the profile page, the box next to "gender" says "(this is free-form, go nuts)".
I've always taken this to mean "go wild", but I realized it could also be a rah-rah rooting-for-the-male-team statement. Am I losing my mind? (go nuts!)
I've always taken this to mean "go wild", but I realized it could also be a rah-rah rooting-for-the-male-team statement. Am I losing my mind? (go nuts!)
It isn't allowed, null terminated. This is clear and intentional abuse of Metatalk.
posted by Meatbomb at 2:16 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by Meatbomb at 2:16 AM on April 26, 2008
Well mathowie is a notorious chauvinist prick, so you're probably right.
posted by cillit bang at 2:44 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by cillit bang at 2:44 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
What really bothers me about this site is the constant and consistent and repeated use of white type on a colored background. Racism, pure and simple.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:40 AM on April 26, 2008 [5 favorites]
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:40 AM on April 26, 2008 [5 favorites]
FFS, what part of "it isn't allowed" do you fuckos not understand? I order this thread closed immediately.
posted by Meatbomb at 3:47 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by Meatbomb at 3:47 AM on April 26, 2008
I'm pretty sure that this thread was only started to give mathowie material to work with at ROFLCon.
posted by 2or3whiskeysodas at 3:54 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by 2or3whiskeysodas at 3:54 AM on April 26, 2008
mine says (this is free-form, go flaps) so maybe it's randomised to even things up?
posted by fire&wings at 4:03 AM on April 26, 2008 [2 favorites]
posted by fire&wings at 4:03 AM on April 26, 2008 [2 favorites]
It's a encouragement to define your gender to accord with the mores of the most intense fans of 围棋, the venerable Oriental board game. I find this an unconscionable prejudice against proper, Persian, Chess.
posted by Abiezer at 4:05 AM on April 26, 2008 [4 favorites]
posted by Abiezer at 4:05 AM on April 26, 2008 [4 favorites]
Mine said "this is free-form, go nads" and let me tell you, I sent quite a letter of complaint about it.
posted by Your Time Machine Sucks at 4:49 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by Your Time Machine Sucks at 4:49 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
nuts (nts) Slang
adj.
1. Crazy; insane.
2. Extremely enthusiastic: I'm nuts about opera.
Source.
Nothing male about it, sorry to disappoint you.
posted by Marie Mon Dieu at 4:49 AM on April 26, 2008
adj.
1. Crazy; insane.
2. Extremely enthusiastic: I'm nuts about opera.
Source.
Nothing male about it, sorry to disappoint you.
posted by Marie Mon Dieu at 4:49 AM on April 26, 2008
Nuts to that.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 5:08 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by Kirth Gerson at 5:08 AM on April 26, 2008
Sucks to your ass-mar.
posted by danb at 5:11 AM on April 26, 2008 [2 favorites]
posted by danb at 5:11 AM on April 26, 2008 [2 favorites]
It's also a very FLORIDAIST statement, since they have outlawed nuts down there, if I remember correctly.
posted by soundofsuburbia at 5:17 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by soundofsuburbia at 5:17 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
it means "go wild" however your average MeFite interprets that.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 5:42 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 5:42 AM on April 26, 2008
Goooooooooooooooooo PENIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
posted by Fuzzy Skinner at 5:44 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by Fuzzy Skinner at 5:44 AM on April 26, 2008
Aw nuts, I saw the chimes of free form flashing again.
posted by moonbird at 5:50 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by moonbird at 5:50 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
Take back the language. One day the herstory books will tell of this great injustice. And when you look up 'MetaFilter' in the cuntionary, you will see only one word: boizone.
posted by dgaicun at 5:59 AM on April 26, 2008 [18 favorites]
posted by dgaicun at 5:59 AM on April 26, 2008 [18 favorites]
Can we vote for stupidest MeTa EVAR? 'cause I'm voting for this one then.
Imagine the video series: Nuts gone WILD!!!
posted by Eekacat at 6:22 AM on April 26, 2008
Imagine the video series: Nuts gone WILD!!!
posted by Eekacat at 6:22 AM on April 26, 2008
Would it be less "rah-rah rooting-for-the-male-team" if instead it said "go titties"?
posted by adamrice at 6:39 AM on April 26, 2008 [3 favorites]
posted by adamrice at 6:39 AM on April 26, 2008 [3 favorites]
...
posted by kittens for breakfast at 6:46 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by kittens for breakfast at 6:46 AM on April 26, 2008
The answer to your question is yes.
posted by Pater Aletheias at 6:49 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by Pater Aletheias at 6:49 AM on April 26, 2008
it means "go wild" however your average MeFite interprets that.
And there is nothing wilder than an unchecked testicle, so, you know, QED.
Fellas, have 'em checked at least once every few years.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:42 AM on April 26, 2008
And there is nothing wilder than an unchecked testicle, so, you know, QED.
Fellas, have 'em checked at least once every few years.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:42 AM on April 26, 2008
Not only is this "rah-rah rooting-for-the-male-team," it's also an affront to eunuchs everywhere.
I demand that the text be changed to "go taint!"
posted by Afroblanco at 7:44 AM on April 26, 2008
I demand that the text be changed to "go taint!"
posted by Afroblanco at 7:44 AM on April 26, 2008
Yeah, otherwise they go feral, and nobody likes a feral ballsack.
posted by nebulawindphone at 7:45 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by nebulawindphone at 7:45 AM on April 26, 2008
It's actually very progressive of MetaFilter to abolish the gender binary on profile pages. Now if only we could do something about "Taken". Like "taken" mathowie and pb hostage at tonight's meetup and forcing them to fix it, make me a mod, and then sign my yearbook.
If only people had signed my yearbook, I might not have become evil. *snif*
posted by Eideteker at 7:47 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
If only people had signed my yearbook, I might not have become evil. *snif*
posted by Eideteker at 7:47 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
Wait, what am I talking about? The evil is why no one wanted to sign my yearbook, and I had to design that mind control ray to make them sign it. I like being evil. In fact, that was my yearbook quote: "I like being evil." Beneath a picture of me steepling my fingers. Oh, and look at the wildness in my eyes. How much it's faded, now that I'm living in an evil two bedroom house in the evil suburbs, with my wife and two evil kids, Hench and Henchier, and an evil minivan equipped with modified vehicular-mounted sidewinder missiles. How I miss the follies of evil youth!
posted by Eideteker at 7:54 AM on April 26, 2008 [8 favorites]
posted by Eideteker at 7:54 AM on April 26, 2008 [8 favorites]
It's obviously a reference to No U-Turn Syndrome. This explains the lack of Singaporeans on this site, who as a people lack the basic creativity to handle something free-form the primary purpose of which is to go nuts with.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 7:55 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 7:55 AM on April 26, 2008
I loved Feral Ballsack in The Bride of Frankenstein.
posted by Sailormom at 8:08 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by Sailormom at 8:08 AM on April 26, 2008
I just wanted to say that I really appreciate the fact that the gender box is indeed free-form. Wish more online services were so progressive.
Meanwhile, this is a stupid fucken MeTa.
posted by youarenothere at 8:14 AM on April 26, 2008
Meanwhile, this is a stupid fucken MeTa.
posted by youarenothere at 8:14 AM on April 26, 2008
I just wanted to say that I really appreciate the fact that the gender box is indeed free-form. Wish more online services were so progressive.
And yet relationship status remains drop-down. Doh.
posted by allkindsoftime at 8:26 AM on April 26, 2008 [3 favorites]
And yet relationship status remains drop-down. Doh.
posted by allkindsoftime at 8:26 AM on April 26, 2008 [3 favorites]
Don't you try and limit me to freeform! I'll go nuts if I want or maybe I won't.
Freedom has become my cage.
posted by nola at 8:27 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
Freedom has become my cage.
posted by nola at 8:27 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
Mine says "go ovaries".
Make of that what you will.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 8:42 AM on April 26, 2008
Make of that what you will.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 8:42 AM on April 26, 2008
Two peanuts walk down a street. One was assaulted.
Thank you, thank you very much.
posted by djgh at 9:13 AM on April 26, 2008
Thank you, thank you very much.
posted by djgh at 9:13 AM on April 26, 2008
This MeTa is some sort of in-joke, right? Please?
"You are old," said the youth, "as I mentioned before,
And make errors few people could bear;
You complain about everyone's English but yours --
Do you really think this is quite fair?"
or what Pater Aletheias said at 9:49...
posted by dawson at 9:18 AM on April 26, 2008
"You are old," said the youth, "as I mentioned before,
And make errors few people could bear;
You complain about everyone's English but yours --
Do you really think this is quite fair?"
or what Pater Aletheias said at 9:49...
posted by dawson at 9:18 AM on April 26, 2008
Mine says "go outside"
posted by owhydididoit at 9:32 AM on April 26, 2008 [2 favorites]
posted by owhydididoit at 9:32 AM on April 26, 2008 [2 favorites]
This really happened: I just woke up from a dream about 15 minutes ago in which I discovered a battery-powered device you could put in your shoes to analyze your gait and report back audibly what you're doing wrong.
It had three settings: Lance Armstrong, Kenyan, and quonsar.
posted by middleclasstool at 9:40 AM on April 26, 2008 [4 favorites]
It had three settings: Lance Armstrong, Kenyan, and quonsar.
posted by middleclasstool at 9:40 AM on April 26, 2008 [4 favorites]
the box for male, female or other is labeled 'gender'. I see this as a veiled threat to masculinity. Obviously gen='Jen' which is only a feminine name and I suspect that Matt and everyone are promoting non-consensual, forced pedo-bestiality...or something. At any rate, I'm outraged I tell you. This will not stand. This assault against spiritual decency and equanimity will not stand.
posted by dawson at 10:03 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by dawson at 10:03 AM on April 26, 2008
but will it bend over?
posted by quonsar at 10:11 AM on April 26, 2008 [2 favorites]
posted by quonsar at 10:11 AM on April 26, 2008 [2 favorites]
at the bottom of this page it says « Older So, uh.. Toronto. Booze. Etc.... Am I crazy for thinking that Toronto is trying to kill off its old people via alcohol poisoning? And that Matt Haughey is just going along with this nefarious plot? He's never explicitly stated that he doesn't want to kill Toronto senior citizens.
It's a small thing... but they add up.
posted by taz at 10:19 AM on April 26, 2008
It's a small thing... but they add up.
posted by taz at 10:19 AM on April 26, 2008
^ quonsar is back? Since when? Mind fuck.
posted by HotPatatta at 10:19 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by HotPatatta at 10:19 AM on April 26, 2008
I go nuts for dough nuts.
posted by not_on_display at 10:28 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by not_on_display at 10:28 AM on April 26, 2008
White letters can't dance.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:36 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:36 AM on April 26, 2008
Something is happening here, and I'm getting a little worried. By way of introduction, let me just say that the ultimate aim of Metafilter's self-fulfilling prophecies is to restructure society as a pyramid with Metafilter at the top, Metafilter's secret agents directly underneath, vicious profiteers beneath them, and the rest of at the bottom. This new societal structure will enable Metafilter to provide brutal, intellectually challenged ingrates with an irresistible temptation to manipulate public understanding of propagandism, which makes me realize that it says that everyone would be a lot safer if it were to monitor all of our personal communications and financial transactions -- even our library records. Why on Earth does it need to monitor our library records? The best answer comes from Metafilter itself. That is, if you pay careful attention to its bestial outbursts you'll undoubtedly notice that Metafilter has for a long time been arguing that five-crystal orgone generators can eliminate mind-control energies that are being radiated from secret, underground, government facilities. Had it instead been arguing that it has overstated its case against me by alluding to an illusory past, I might cede it its point. As it stands, the leap of faith required to bridge the logical gap in Metafilter's arguments is simply too terrifying for me to contemplate. What I do often contemplate, however, is how if it doesn't like it here, then perhaps it should go elsewhere.
Nowhere in the Bible does it say, "Skin color means more than skill and gender is more impressive than genius". This is all well and good, but Metafilter must have known that its effusions would cause high levels of outrage and would generate many letters in response (like this one). But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that its myrmidons can be stereotyped as stultiloquent tools of prepackaged political ideology and incompetent dissemblers to boot? The answer has two parts to it. The first part regards the manner in which Metafilter always gives noncommittal answers to questions. The second part of the answer is focused on the the way that I want to contribute to the intellectual and spiritual health of the body politic. That may seem simple enough, but Metafilter can't relate to anyone other than myopic blockheads. Do I blame society for this? No, I blame Metafilter.
By supporting obscene schizophrenics with inferior moral standards, we devalue ourselves, the lives of our children, and the heroes who died for our freedoms. With this central point cleared up, the rest of its arguments are rendered moot, as if Metafilter were to get its hands on the levers of power it'd immediately hurt people's feelings. If you don't believe me then consider that blasphemous monomaniacs are born, not made. That dictum is as unimpeachable as the "poeta nascitur, non fit" that it echoes and as irreproachable as the brocard that we must reach out to people with the message that investigators who have spent many years attempting to penetrate the dark recesses of Metafilter's featherbrained underworld frequently conclude that Metafilter's consistent lack of regard for others will convict me without trial, jury, or reading one complete paragraph of this letter eventually. We must alert people of that. We must educate them. We must inspire them. And we must encourage them to criticize the obvious incongruities presented by Metafilter and its cheerleaders.
Metafilter has convinced a lot of people that honor counts for nothing. One must pause in admiration at this triumph of media manipulation. While profligate wimps have previously relied on violence to get their way, their new manipulation of abominable put-downs has combined with violence to manipulate the unseen mechanisms of society so as to reduce human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Should you think I'm saying too much, please note that it is pointless to fret about the damage already caused by Metafilter's money-grubbing strictures. The past cannot be changed. We must cope with the present if we hope to affect our future and acknowledge that even when Metafilter bespeaks us fair to our faces it expresses quite different thoughts behind our backs.
Metafilter's machinations represent a backward step of hundreds of years, a backward step into a chasm with no bottom save the endless darkness of death. By now, the reader has discerned that Metafilter's indifferent as to whether its words mean anything or not. So let me just add that if it sincerely believes that there's no difference between normal people like you and me and foul-mouthed quidnuncs then it must be smoking something illegal. Metafilter's disciples perpetrate all kinds of atrocities while alleging that they are simply not capable of such activities and that therefore, the atrocities must be the product of my and your feverish and overworked imaginations. If Metafilter continues to portray mawkish Metafilter clones as busybodies, the result can be a tone-deafness, a cluelessness, on matters that are at the center of experience for vast segments of the population. Metafilter's antics are based on a denial of reality, on the substitution of a deliberately falsified picture of the world in place of reality. And this dishonesty, this refusal to admit the truth, will have some very serious consequences for all of us by the end of the decade.
Metafilter should hide its head in shame before the judgment of future generations, whose tongue it will no longer be possible to stop and which, therefore, will say what today all of us know to be true: I've tried explaining to Metafilter's goombahs that Metafilter trumpets unsophisticated revanchism laced with benighted plagiarism. Unfortunately, it is clear to me in talking to them that they have no comprehension of what I'm saying. I might as well be talking to creatures from Mars. In fact, I'd bet Martians would be more likely to discern that piteous and larcenous, Metafilter's fulminations resemble a dilapidated shed. Kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will collapse, proving my claim that if Metafilter is victorious in its quest to demand special treatment that, in many cases, borders on the ridiculous, then its crown will be the funeral wreath of humanity.
While these incidents may seem minor, Metafilter insists that it has no choice but to exploit the feelings of charity and guilt that many people have over the plight of the homeless. Its reasoning is that it has achieved sainthood. Yes, I realize that that argument makes no sense, but Metafilter's platitudes are becoming increasingly mindless. They have already begun to further political and social goals wholly or in part through activities that involve force or violence and a violation of criminal law. Now fast-forward a few years to a time in which they have enabled Metafilter to create a factitious demand for its two-faced exegeses. If you don't want such a time to come then help me derail Metafilter's selfish little schemes. Help me identify, challenge, defy, disrupt, and, finally, destroy the institutions that introduce a zeitgeist of quislingism to our society.
Are Metafilter's methods of interpretation good for the country? The nation's suicide statistics, drug statistics, crime statistics, divorce statistics, and mental illness statistics give us part of the answer. These statistics should make it clear that it has been brought to my attention that its irritable rejoinders do not comport with my policy always to launch an all-out ideological attack against the forces of philistinism. While this is certainly true, it periodically puts up a facade of reform. However, underneath the pretty surface, it's always business as usual.
One of the great mysteries of modern life is, Do Metafilter's demands appear reasonable to anyone other than the most brain-damaged masters of deceit I've ever seen? My answer is, as always, a model of clarity and the soul of wit: I don't know. However, I do know that Metafilter's catch-phrases are like an enormous sesquipedalianism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must get us out of the hammerlock that Metafilter is holding us in because Metafilter is not as wanton or demonic as you might think. It's more so.
Let's be realistic: by refusing to act, by refusing to clean up the country and get it back on course again, we are giving Metafilter the power to make excessive use of foul language. In a broad-brush sense, Metafilter's behavior might be different if it were told that there are deeper issues afoot here. Of course, as far as Metafilter's concerned, this fact will fall into the category of, "My mind is made up; don't confuse me with the facts." That's why I'm telling you that it considers it a moral obligation to fool and cheat others wherever and whenever possible. I've said that before and I've said it often, but perhaps I haven't been concrete enough or specific enough, so now I'll try to remedy those shortcomings. I'll try to be a lot more specific and concrete when I explain that it claims to have data supporting its assertion that truth is whatever your grievance group says it is. Naturally, it insists that it can't actually show us that data -- for some unspecified reason, of course. My guess is that it's hiding something. Maybe it's hiding the fact that if it feels ridiculed by all the attention my letters are bringing it, then that's just too darn bad. Metafilter's arrogance has brought this upon itself. Now that this letter is over, I pray that my logic and passion have convinced you that the whole issue of hooliganism is far more complex than Metafilter wants to admit.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 10:37 AM on April 26, 2008 [8 favorites]
Nowhere in the Bible does it say, "Skin color means more than skill and gender is more impressive than genius". This is all well and good, but Metafilter must have known that its effusions would cause high levels of outrage and would generate many letters in response (like this one). But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that its myrmidons can be stereotyped as stultiloquent tools of prepackaged political ideology and incompetent dissemblers to boot? The answer has two parts to it. The first part regards the manner in which Metafilter always gives noncommittal answers to questions. The second part of the answer is focused on the the way that I want to contribute to the intellectual and spiritual health of the body politic. That may seem simple enough, but Metafilter can't relate to anyone other than myopic blockheads. Do I blame society for this? No, I blame Metafilter.
By supporting obscene schizophrenics with inferior moral standards, we devalue ourselves, the lives of our children, and the heroes who died for our freedoms. With this central point cleared up, the rest of its arguments are rendered moot, as if Metafilter were to get its hands on the levers of power it'd immediately hurt people's feelings. If you don't believe me then consider that blasphemous monomaniacs are born, not made. That dictum is as unimpeachable as the "poeta nascitur, non fit" that it echoes and as irreproachable as the brocard that we must reach out to people with the message that investigators who have spent many years attempting to penetrate the dark recesses of Metafilter's featherbrained underworld frequently conclude that Metafilter's consistent lack of regard for others will convict me without trial, jury, or reading one complete paragraph of this letter eventually. We must alert people of that. We must educate them. We must inspire them. And we must encourage them to criticize the obvious incongruities presented by Metafilter and its cheerleaders.
Metafilter has convinced a lot of people that honor counts for nothing. One must pause in admiration at this triumph of media manipulation. While profligate wimps have previously relied on violence to get their way, their new manipulation of abominable put-downs has combined with violence to manipulate the unseen mechanisms of society so as to reduce human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Should you think I'm saying too much, please note that it is pointless to fret about the damage already caused by Metafilter's money-grubbing strictures. The past cannot be changed. We must cope with the present if we hope to affect our future and acknowledge that even when Metafilter bespeaks us fair to our faces it expresses quite different thoughts behind our backs.
Metafilter's machinations represent a backward step of hundreds of years, a backward step into a chasm with no bottom save the endless darkness of death. By now, the reader has discerned that Metafilter's indifferent as to whether its words mean anything or not. So let me just add that if it sincerely believes that there's no difference between normal people like you and me and foul-mouthed quidnuncs then it must be smoking something illegal. Metafilter's disciples perpetrate all kinds of atrocities while alleging that they are simply not capable of such activities and that therefore, the atrocities must be the product of my and your feverish and overworked imaginations. If Metafilter continues to portray mawkish Metafilter clones as busybodies, the result can be a tone-deafness, a cluelessness, on matters that are at the center of experience for vast segments of the population. Metafilter's antics are based on a denial of reality, on the substitution of a deliberately falsified picture of the world in place of reality. And this dishonesty, this refusal to admit the truth, will have some very serious consequences for all of us by the end of the decade.
Metafilter should hide its head in shame before the judgment of future generations, whose tongue it will no longer be possible to stop and which, therefore, will say what today all of us know to be true: I've tried explaining to Metafilter's goombahs that Metafilter trumpets unsophisticated revanchism laced with benighted plagiarism. Unfortunately, it is clear to me in talking to them that they have no comprehension of what I'm saying. I might as well be talking to creatures from Mars. In fact, I'd bet Martians would be more likely to discern that piteous and larcenous, Metafilter's fulminations resemble a dilapidated shed. Kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will collapse, proving my claim that if Metafilter is victorious in its quest to demand special treatment that, in many cases, borders on the ridiculous, then its crown will be the funeral wreath of humanity.
While these incidents may seem minor, Metafilter insists that it has no choice but to exploit the feelings of charity and guilt that many people have over the plight of the homeless. Its reasoning is that it has achieved sainthood. Yes, I realize that that argument makes no sense, but Metafilter's platitudes are becoming increasingly mindless. They have already begun to further political and social goals wholly or in part through activities that involve force or violence and a violation of criminal law. Now fast-forward a few years to a time in which they have enabled Metafilter to create a factitious demand for its two-faced exegeses. If you don't want such a time to come then help me derail Metafilter's selfish little schemes. Help me identify, challenge, defy, disrupt, and, finally, destroy the institutions that introduce a zeitgeist of quislingism to our society.
Are Metafilter's methods of interpretation good for the country? The nation's suicide statistics, drug statistics, crime statistics, divorce statistics, and mental illness statistics give us part of the answer. These statistics should make it clear that it has been brought to my attention that its irritable rejoinders do not comport with my policy always to launch an all-out ideological attack against the forces of philistinism. While this is certainly true, it periodically puts up a facade of reform. However, underneath the pretty surface, it's always business as usual.
One of the great mysteries of modern life is, Do Metafilter's demands appear reasonable to anyone other than the most brain-damaged masters of deceit I've ever seen? My answer is, as always, a model of clarity and the soul of wit: I don't know. However, I do know that Metafilter's catch-phrases are like an enormous sesquipedalianism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must get us out of the hammerlock that Metafilter is holding us in because Metafilter is not as wanton or demonic as you might think. It's more so.
Let's be realistic: by refusing to act, by refusing to clean up the country and get it back on course again, we are giving Metafilter the power to make excessive use of foul language. In a broad-brush sense, Metafilter's behavior might be different if it were told that there are deeper issues afoot here. Of course, as far as Metafilter's concerned, this fact will fall into the category of, "My mind is made up; don't confuse me with the facts." That's why I'm telling you that it considers it a moral obligation to fool and cheat others wherever and whenever possible. I've said that before and I've said it often, but perhaps I haven't been concrete enough or specific enough, so now I'll try to remedy those shortcomings. I'll try to be a lot more specific and concrete when I explain that it claims to have data supporting its assertion that truth is whatever your grievance group says it is. Naturally, it insists that it can't actually show us that data -- for some unspecified reason, of course. My guess is that it's hiding something. Maybe it's hiding the fact that if it feels ridiculed by all the attention my letters are bringing it, then that's just too darn bad. Metafilter's arrogance has brought this upon itself. Now that this letter is over, I pray that my logic and passion have convinced you that the whole issue of hooliganism is far more complex than Metafilter wants to admit.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 10:37 AM on April 26, 2008 [8 favorites]
quonsar isn't actually back; we just changed his password to something obvious so those in the know can log into his account when they feel like it.
This is also the case with the "mathowie" account.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:37 AM on April 26, 2008 [3 favorites]
This is also the case with the "mathowie" account.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:37 AM on April 26, 2008 [3 favorites]
SWING TO THE LEFT! SWAY TO THE RIGHT!
RE-TRACT! HANG LOW! FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT!
GO-O-O-O-O NUTS!
posted by nebulawindphone at 10:38 AM on April 26, 2008 [2 favorites]
RE-TRACT! HANG LOW! FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT!
GO-O-O-O-O NUTS!
posted by nebulawindphone at 10:38 AM on April 26, 2008 [2 favorites]
Flagged as: "flagging".
posted by loquacious at 10:44 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by loquacious at 10:44 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
Ah, I get it. This is performance art, a caricature of of the conservative views on liberals. No MeFite could possibly be this stupid for real.
(If this was actually a serious comment, I grieve for the future of humanity.)
posted by Malor at 10:56 AM on April 26, 2008
(If this was actually a serious comment, I grieve for the future of humanity.)
posted by Malor at 10:56 AM on April 26, 2008
Instead of "go nuts", the first draft was "go hysterical". The Suicide Girls nearly pulled their ads over it.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:59 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:59 AM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
quonsar isn't actually back; we just changed his password to something obvious so those in the know can log into his account when they feel like it.
(This is pants-form, go fish)
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 11:01 AM on April 26, 2008
(This is pants-form, go fish)
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 11:01 AM on April 26, 2008
I'd like to take this time to tell a stupid joke. thusly:
Q: How do you make 5 pounds of fat attractive?
A: Put a nipple on it.
Thank you.
posted by puke & cry at 11:22 AM on April 26, 2008
Q: How do you make 5 pounds of fat attractive?
A: Put a nipple on it.
Thank you.
posted by puke & cry at 11:22 AM on April 26, 2008
null terminated,
You have misunderstood Our Intentions.
Gender is free form. Enjoy it.
posted by the Cabal at 11:32 AM on April 26, 2008
You have misunderstood Our Intentions.
Gender is free form. Enjoy it.
posted by the Cabal at 11:32 AM on April 26, 2008
So is the Cabal MetaFilter's bootleg version of Anonymous?
posted by youarenothere at 11:44 AM on April 26, 2008
posted by youarenothere at 11:44 AM on April 26, 2008
So is this where I come for pie? Or is it boobies over here, and pie over there? Is there a urinating elephant involved? Does anything, indeed, vibrate?
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 12:27 PM on April 26, 2008
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 12:27 PM on April 26, 2008
cortex writes "Gobamaries."
This sexist comment discriminates against Hillary!
posted by alegre at Hillary:is:44 PM on Don't Stop Believing in an August Surprise [+][!]
posted by orthogonality at 12:52 PM on April 26, 2008
This sexist comment discriminates against Hillary!
posted by alegre at Hillary:is:44 PM on Don't Stop Believing in an August Surprise [+][!]
posted by orthogonality at 12:52 PM on April 26, 2008
Mine just says sex, and I said, Ewwww, yes please!
What followed was a randy 70s British farce.
posted by Astro Zombie at 1:16 PM on April 26, 2008 [2 favorites]
What followed was a randy 70s British farce.
posted by Astro Zombie at 1:16 PM on April 26, 2008 [2 favorites]
Go-Bots are dual-formed, with one of these sexy continuum things in between.
posted by danOstuporStar at 1:45 PM on April 26, 2008
posted by danOstuporStar at 1:45 PM on April 26, 2008
Wow. I suddenly feel a lot less dorky.
posted by loquacious at 2:30 PM on April 26, 2008
posted by loquacious at 2:30 PM on April 26, 2008
No one has yet put forth the thesis that "go nuts" actually refers to "make the nuts go away", aka male neutering?
posted by wendell at 2:32 PM on April 26, 2008
posted by wendell at 2:32 PM on April 26, 2008
What is meatbomb going on about up there?
posted by sourwookie at 4:01 PM on April 26, 2008
posted by sourwookie at 4:01 PM on April 26, 2008
This thread is the boyzone singularity.
posted by Avenger at 4:27 PM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by Avenger at 4:27 PM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
I was told there is no cabal, and now everything I thought I knew has been turned on its head.
Hey, has anyone come up with a sexy alternative for the word "balls" yet? I'm still waiting.
Nuts, sack, testes, testicles and satchel do not count.
posted by loiseau at 4:33 PM on April 26, 2008
Hey, has anyone come up with a sexy alternative for the word "balls" yet? I'm still waiting.
Nuts, sack, testes, testicles and satchel do not count.
posted by loiseau at 4:33 PM on April 26, 2008
They should really just change it to something unquestionably gender-neutral that can't possibly be taken the wrong way. Something like "go bananas."
posted by Sys Rq at 4:49 PM on April 26, 2008
posted by Sys Rq at 4:49 PM on April 26, 2008
...go forth and multiply.
posted by timeistight at 4:57 PM on April 26, 2008
posted by timeistight at 4:57 PM on April 26, 2008
de chaleur?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:01 PM on April 26, 2008
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:01 PM on April 26, 2008
Congratulations! You have!
posted by nebulawindphone at 5:03 PM on April 26, 2008
posted by nebulawindphone at 5:03 PM on April 26, 2008
Do your ---- hang low? Do they wobble to and fro? Can you tie them in a knot? Can you tie them in a bow?
posted by Sys Rq at 5:06 PM on April 26, 2008
posted by Sys Rq at 5:06 PM on April 26, 2008
There once was a man from Nantucket.
This joke's really stupid so fuck it.
posted by loquacious at 5:11 PM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
This joke's really stupid so fuck it.
posted by loquacious at 5:11 PM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
But I've never heard about the balls of the man from Nantucket. I assume he was large, and could truck?
posted by dawson at 5:15 PM on April 26, 2008
posted by dawson at 5:15 PM on April 26, 2008
So if The Chippery sells cookie dough what does The Nutsackery sell?
posted by nebulawindphone at 5:32 PM on April 26, 2008
posted by nebulawindphone at 5:32 PM on April 26, 2008
While oysters have separate sexes, they may change sex one or more times during their life span.
According to a team of US and Italian chemists, bivalve molluscs - the group of shellfish that includes oysters, clams and mussels - contain compounds that have been shown to be effective in releasing sexual hormones in humans, says science portal healthinkonline.com.
"The supposition for centuries was that oysters, clams and mussels have been thought to have aphrodisiac properties, and they were eaten raw for that purpose," George Fisher, a chemistry professor at Miami's Barry University, said at an American Chemical Society meeting here.
"We found there might be a scientific basis for the aphrodisiac properties of these molluscs. We think that this could be the first scientific evidence of some substance."
According to them, compounds such as D-aspartic acid and NMDA (N-methyl-D-aspartate) in shellfish stimulate the secretion of testosterone and oestrogen in humans
Clearly Sexist.
posted by dawson at 5:55 PM on April 26, 2008
According to a team of US and Italian chemists, bivalve molluscs - the group of shellfish that includes oysters, clams and mussels - contain compounds that have been shown to be effective in releasing sexual hormones in humans, says science portal healthinkonline.com.
"The supposition for centuries was that oysters, clams and mussels have been thought to have aphrodisiac properties, and they were eaten raw for that purpose," George Fisher, a chemistry professor at Miami's Barry University, said at an American Chemical Society meeting here.
"We found there might be a scientific basis for the aphrodisiac properties of these molluscs. We think that this could be the first scientific evidence of some substance."
According to them, compounds such as D-aspartic acid and NMDA (N-methyl-D-aspartate) in shellfish stimulate the secretion of testosterone and oestrogen in humans
Clearly Sexist.
posted by dawson at 5:55 PM on April 26, 2008
Hey, has anyone come up with a sexy alternative for the word "balls" yet? I'm still waiting.
Nuts, sack, testes, testicles and satchel do not count.
"Jazz apples."
...what do you mean, "that's less sexy than a dead horse in a swamp"? Ah, screw you.
posted by flashboy at 6:08 PM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
Nuts, sack, testes, testicles and satchel do not count.
"Jazz apples."
...what do you mean, "that's less sexy than a dead horse in a swamp"? Ah, screw you.
posted by flashboy at 6:08 PM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
Hey, has anyone come up with a sexy alternative for the word "balls" yet? I'm still waiting.
Nuts, sack, testes, testicles and satchel do not count.
Satchel? I had a satchel as a schoolboy. Now I have a rucksack (definitely not a man-bag). It's roomy enough to keep my maggles in tho.
posted by urbanwhaleshark at 7:08 PM on April 26, 2008
Nuts, sack, testes, testicles and satchel do not count.
Satchel? I had a satchel as a schoolboy. Now I have a rucksack (definitely not a man-bag). It's roomy enough to keep my maggles in tho.
posted by urbanwhaleshark at 7:08 PM on April 26, 2008
Obviously the people who see something other than "go nuts" have IP addresses that map to Florida, where only outlaws have nuts.
posted by TedW at 7:25 PM on April 26, 2008
posted by TedW at 7:25 PM on April 26, 2008
O hai!
posted by Ceiling Cat at 9:44 PM on April 26, 2008
posted by Ceiling Cat at 9:44 PM on April 26, 2008
Hey, has anyone come up with a sexy alternative for the word "balls" yet? I'm still waiting.
Wouldn't at least one person in the world have to find balls sexy in the first place for that to happen?
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:46 PM on April 26, 2008
Wouldn't at least one person in the world have to find balls sexy in the first place for that to happen?
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:46 PM on April 26, 2008
Nothing that anyone keeps in a sack can be sexy. Doubly true when the sack is made of skin.
posted by Jofus at 11:29 PM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by Jofus at 11:29 PM on April 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
"Hey, has anyone come up with a sexy alternative for the word "balls" yet? I'm still waiting."
UbuRoivas: Wouldn't at least one person in the world have to find balls sexy in the first place for that to happen?
Well I wouldn't admire them in a shop window but in intimate times and places they can be fun.
I'm pretty sure most straight women and gay men have come into close contact with someone else's balls at some point -- doesn't it seem fitting that there should be a way to mention them during a roll in the hay that doesn't sound chuckleworthy?
posted by loiseau at 2:18 AM on April 27, 2008
UbuRoivas: Wouldn't at least one person in the world have to find balls sexy in the first place for that to happen?
Well I wouldn't admire them in a shop window but in intimate times and places they can be fun.
I'm pretty sure most straight women and gay men have come into close contact with someone else's balls at some point -- doesn't it seem fitting that there should be a way to mention them during a roll in the hay that doesn't sound chuckleworthy?
posted by loiseau at 2:18 AM on April 27, 2008
Nothing that anyone keeps in a sack can be sexy.
There's a yer mom joke in there somewhere, but I'm just too darn classy to go there. That's me. Yup.
posted by juv3nal at 2:39 AM on April 27, 2008
There's a yer mom joke in there somewhere, but I'm just too darn classy to go there. That's me. Yup.
posted by juv3nal at 2:39 AM on April 27, 2008
Cortex: Gobamaries.
I just ate a Whoopie Pie the other night, which I learned are called Gobs down south. Now this!
It's, it's a sign I tell you! The south is going to rise again and next thing you know, we'll be forced into eating beans and calling it Hoppin' John!
I am gobsmacked. The world is coming to an end as we know it. Excuse me, I have to go warn the folks at B&M before it's too late.
P.S. I vote for "cajones."
posted by Marie Mon Dieu at 3:37 AM on April 27, 2008
I just ate a Whoopie Pie the other night, which I learned are called Gobs down south. Now this!
It's, it's a sign I tell you! The south is going to rise again and next thing you know, we'll be forced into eating beans and calling it Hoppin' John!
I am gobsmacked. The world is coming to an end as we know it. Excuse me, I have to go warn the folks at B&M before it's too late.
P.S. I vote for "cajones."
posted by Marie Mon Dieu at 3:37 AM on April 27, 2008
I'm pretty sure most straight women and gay men have come into close contact with someone else's balls at some point -- doesn't it seem fitting that there should be a way to mention them during a roll in the hay that doesn't sound chuckleworthy?
sure, but they're still just. not. sexy.
you'd find a cute pet name for them probably later than you'd name your haemorrhoids.
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:41 AM on April 27, 2008
sure, but they're still just. not. sexy.
you'd find a cute pet name for them probably later than you'd name your haemorrhoids.
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:41 AM on April 27, 2008
quonsars?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:33 AM on April 27, 2008
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:33 AM on April 27, 2008
ok, now that's settled, what shall i name my balls?
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:37 AM on April 27, 2008 [2 favorites]
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:37 AM on April 27, 2008 [2 favorites]
What the fuck?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:30 AM on April 27, 2008
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:30 AM on April 27, 2008
padawans.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:32 AM on April 27, 2008
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:32 AM on April 27, 2008
Never mind the bollocks, here's the wonderchicken!
Also, this thread makes my fucking teeth hurt. Kill it with CNN. Kill it now.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:41 AM on April 27, 2008 [1 favorite]
Also, this thread makes my fucking teeth hurt. Kill it with CNN. Kill it now.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:41 AM on April 27, 2008 [1 favorite]
ok, now that's settled, what shall i name my balls?
Left one Tom, right one Harry.
posted by Marie Mon Dieu at 8:08 AM on April 27, 2008 [3 favorites]
Left one Tom, right one Harry.
posted by Marie Mon Dieu at 8:08 AM on April 27, 2008 [3 favorites]
Sixteen in the clip and one in the hole
Nate Dogg is about to make some bodies turn cold
now they droppin and yellin
it's a tad bit late
Nate Dogg and Warren G had to regulate
posted by chunking express at 8:53 AM on April 27, 2008
Nate Dogg is about to make some bodies turn cold
now they droppin and yellin
it's a tad bit late
Nate Dogg and Warren G had to regulate
posted by chunking express at 8:53 AM on April 27, 2008
sure, but they're still just. not. sexy.
Dude, I am the owner of a male body and I am amazed that anyone finds any of our parts anything other than ridiculous, but it's a big world. Go figure.
posted by jonmc at 8:57 AM on April 27, 2008
Dude, I am the owner of a male body and I am amazed that anyone finds any of our parts anything other than ridiculous, but it's a big world. Go figure.
posted by jonmc at 8:57 AM on April 27, 2008
this is free-form, go nuts
I thought it was a smirking slight against people with peanut allergies.
posted by everichon at 10:00 AM on April 27, 2008
I thought it was a smirking slight against people with peanut allergies.
posted by everichon at 10:00 AM on April 27, 2008
They are, however, slightly crazy. You would be too, cooped up in a shell like that with your brother or sister.
posted by Eideteker at 10:38 AM on April 27, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by Eideteker at 10:38 AM on April 27, 2008 [1 favorite]
They are, however, slightly crazy. You would be too, cooped up in a shell like that with your brother or sister.
Sounds like separate bubble domes are in order.
posted by Sys Rq at 10:52 AM on April 27, 2008
Sounds like separate bubble domes are in order.
posted by Sys Rq at 10:52 AM on April 27, 2008
mannaries
Dude, I just made up the word "manmaries" yesterday for a different body part. Saw this guy in the subway, and that's what he had. Yup.
posted by trip and a half at 12:42 PM on April 27, 2008
Dude, I just made up the word "manmaries" yesterday for a different body part. Saw this guy in the subway, and that's what he had. Yup.
posted by trip and a half at 12:42 PM on April 27, 2008
Saw this guy in the subway, and that's what he had.
You could have said hello! I saw you staring.
posted by dawson at 1:13 PM on April 27, 2008
You could have said hello! I saw you staring.
posted by dawson at 1:13 PM on April 27, 2008
Dude, I just made up the word "manmaries" yesterday for a different body part. Saw this guy in the subway, and that's what he had. Yup.
'Mannaries,' is better. I'm just saying.
posted by jonmc at 1:55 PM on April 27, 2008
'Mannaries,' is better. I'm just saying.
posted by jonmc at 1:55 PM on April 27, 2008
Also, it's what you get if you talk about manta rays with a speech impediment.
posted by nebulawindphone at 2:05 PM on April 27, 2008
posted by nebulawindphone at 2:05 PM on April 27, 2008
Yeah, that happens to me all the time. You wouldn't believe how many fights I get into.
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:47 PM on April 27, 2008
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:47 PM on April 27, 2008
*insert 'funny' custom cnn headlines tshirt here*
posted by oxford blue at 4:43 PM on April 27, 2008
posted by oxford blue at 4:43 PM on April 27, 2008
Hey, has anyone come up with a sexy alternative for the word "balls" yet? I'm still waiting.
How about a play on words en francais:
Sac à la man.
posted by sharpener at 9:43 PM on April 27, 2008
How about a play on words en francais:
Sac à la man.
posted by sharpener at 9:43 PM on April 27, 2008
while we're at it, the "how do you know.." after you add a contact could use some free form fields as well (perhaps with some female dangly bit slang afterwards to appease the poor two females that need to be protected from our boyzone?!)
also what goodnewsfortheinsane said re: no u turn + the cabal
posted by Dillonlikescookies at 4:43 AM on April 28, 2008
also what goodnewsfortheinsane said re: no u turn + the cabal
posted by Dillonlikescookies at 4:43 AM on April 28, 2008
You know, everyone is giving null terminated grief, but I think he might have a valid point; there is a really strong pro-nut agenda at work here, and there has been for years. I mean, as a legume supporter, I feel a bit embarrassed at times about making myself heard. I'm afraid that the nut-power movement will soak me in salty brine, crack my shell, and devour me whole.
It's terrifying, I tell you!
I think the line should be more neutral and inoffensive to all; like "go mentally retarded" or something.
posted by quin at 7:54 AM on April 28, 2008
It's terrifying, I tell you!
I think the line should be more neutral and inoffensive to all; like "go mentally retarded" or something.
posted by quin at 7:54 AM on April 28, 2008
some female dangly bit slang afterwards to appease the poor two females that need to be protected from our boyzone?!
If you think females have dangly bits, I do not fear your boyzone.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:03 AM on April 28, 2008 [2 favorites]
If you think females have dangly bits, I do not fear your boyzone.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:03 AM on April 28, 2008 [2 favorites]
1. null_terminated: what the hell is wrong with you. Have you gone nuts? It is just an expression, you know: lets go crazy, let's get nuts, lets go 4 the purple banana..... What an idiotic MeTa.
2. Dude, I just made up the word "manmaries" yesterday for a different body part. Saw this guy in the subway, and that's what he had. Yup.
'Mannaries,' is better. I'm just saying.
What's wrong with plain old moobs?
posted by necessitas at 8:42 AM on April 28, 2008
2. Dude, I just made up the word "manmaries" yesterday for a different body part. Saw this guy in the subway, and that's what he had. Yup.
'Mannaries,' is better. I'm just saying.
What's wrong with plain old moobs?
posted by necessitas at 8:42 AM on April 28, 2008
The Mighty Righty, AKA The Blarney Stone.
Would be The Hefty Lefty except, well, it isn't.
posted by zoinks at 11:24 AM on April 28, 2008
Would be The Hefty Lefty except, well, it isn't.
posted by zoinks at 11:24 AM on April 28, 2008
It'd taken me all night to get her back to her place. When I finally got her to the bedroom, she flopped down on the mattress and told me to go nuts. I'd had no clue she was a robosexual; I was so shocked, I bolted.
posted by Eideteker at 11:50 AM on April 28, 2008
posted by Eideteker at 11:50 AM on April 28, 2008
She had a restraining bolt that you removed? What was she, an R2 unit?
posted by ikkyu2 at 8:48 PM on April 28, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by ikkyu2 at 8:48 PM on April 28, 2008 [1 favorite]
They should really just change it to something unquestionably gender-neutral that can't possibly be taken the wrong way. Something like "go bananas."
So bananas are gender-neutral now? Heaven forbid if you don't have a banana, surely you did something wrong and god took it away from you because you didn't deserve it. Isn't it nice, that this tropical fruit gets to be so privileged within the masculine hegemony. That it gets to pass as unmarked. What about the bagels? WHAT ABOUT THE BAGELS???
posted by halonine at 10:45 AM on April 29, 2008
So bananas are gender-neutral now? Heaven forbid if you don't have a banana, surely you did something wrong and god took it away from you because you didn't deserve it. Isn't it nice, that this tropical fruit gets to be so privileged within the masculine hegemony. That it gets to pass as unmarked. What about the bagels? WHAT ABOUT THE BAGELS???
posted by halonine at 10:45 AM on April 29, 2008
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by chrismear at 2:10 AM on April 26, 2008