MetaTalk tags? August 13, 2008 10:48 AM Subscribe
Why don't we have tags in MetaTalk?
Why have tags in MetaTalk? Not saying I disagree, but what's your argument?
posted by Eideteker at 10:52 AM on August 13, 2008
posted by Eideteker at 10:52 AM on August 13, 2008
batshitinsane flamebait pony
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:53 AM on August 13, 2008 [4 favorites]
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:53 AM on August 13, 2008 [4 favorites]
Perhaps the question should be "Why should we have tags in MetaTalk?"
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:56 AM on August 13, 2008
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:56 AM on August 13, 2008
It seems like some things get hashed out repeatedly on MetaTalk, & finding the previous discussions might help.
What made me think of it this morning is that it would be easier to find the previous muxtape threads, or threads on adding social networks to our profiles.
On the other hand, I could see obnoxious tags.
posted by Pronoiac at 10:59 AM on August 13, 2008 [1 favorite]
What made me think of it this morning is that it would be easier to find the previous muxtape threads, or threads on adding social networks to our profiles.
On the other hand, I could see obnoxious tags.
posted by Pronoiac at 10:59 AM on August 13, 2008 [1 favorite]
Because tags would distract people from the attention-whoring, derails, nit-picking, narcissistic hissy-fits and primate feces-flinging that make up the main attractions of MetaTalk.
posted by jason's_planet at 11:00 AM on August 13, 2008
posted by jason's_planet at 11:00 AM on August 13, 2008
I wouldn't have thought that they would add anything - I can see myself trawling AskMe or MeFi, looking for posts on X, but I'm not going to be going back through MeTa looking for flameouts etc. Plus, I suspect the most useful things that arise from MeTa (pony requests, clarifications on FAQ etc.) get added to the site as a whole through implementation.
Of course, it would be nice to see all 'Congrats!' threads etc., and it might be nice to group together 'historical' threads, but it seems like a lot of work for the admins without a huge amount of payoff in functionality for the site.
posted by djgh at 11:00 AM on August 13, 2008
Of course, it would be nice to see all 'Congrats!' threads etc., and it might be nice to group together 'historical' threads, but it seems like a lot of work for the admins without a huge amount of payoff in functionality for the site.
posted by djgh at 11:00 AM on August 13, 2008
It seems like some things get hashed out repeatedly on MetaTalk, & finding the previous discussions might help.
For that sort of reason, I'm a casual fan of the idea. But that's just me.
On the other hand, I could see obnoxious tags.
Yeah, more work for us when people have one more way to flip the bird in a moment of pique. Not great.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:07 AM on August 13, 2008
For that sort of reason, I'm a casual fan of the idea. But that's just me.
On the other hand, I could see obnoxious tags.
Yeah, more work for us when people have one more way to flip the bird in a moment of pique. Not great.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:07 AM on August 13, 2008
I didn't think flameouts & callouts were central here. Problems with browsers & connectivity to the server have cropped up repeatedly, & pointing out historical & "mefi's own" plaudits would be nice. Seeing all the past, future, & potential meetups in your town would help with keeping track of them.
posted by Pronoiac at 11:07 AM on August 13, 2008
posted by Pronoiac at 11:07 AM on August 13, 2008
Brandon Blatcher: "Perhaps the question should be "Why should we have tags in MetaTalk?""
metafilterhistory. QED.
posted by Plutor at 11:12 AM on August 13, 2008 [2 favorites]
metafilterhistory. QED.
posted by Plutor at 11:12 AM on August 13, 2008 [2 favorites]
Eideteker writes "Why have tags in MetaTalk?"
metafilterhistory.
posted by Mitheral at 11:18 AM on August 13, 2008
metafilterhistory.
posted by Mitheral at 11:18 AM on August 13, 2008
You'd only need three "bitchfest", "flame out" and "worthwhile".
posted by Carbolic at 12:15 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by Carbolic at 12:15 PM on August 13, 2008
The problem is that every MeTa potentially needs all three of your tags, Carbolic.
posted by never used baby shoes at 12:36 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by never used baby shoes at 12:36 PM on August 13, 2008
Can you work up a select list of tags to choose from? Especially for those pre-requested things, or for thankyous or deniedfeaturerequests.
posted by cashman at 12:37 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by cashman at 12:37 PM on August 13, 2008
Yeah, I can't wait for my call-out thread, when whoever it is that hatez0rxxxx my attenti0nwh0rexx gutz0rxxx memails all their friends and they get to add tags to it.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 12:37 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 12:37 PM on August 13, 2008
more work for us
Considering you're all over virtually every metatalk post, usually with multiple replies, at extreme lengths, I find it hard to see how a few clicks on a couple X's to prune some inappropriate tags actually constitutes work.
posted by Dave Faris at 12:45 PM on August 13, 2008
Considering you're all over virtually every metatalk post, usually with multiple replies, at extreme lengths, I find it hard to see how a few clicks on a couple X's to prune some inappropriate tags actually constitutes work.
posted by Dave Faris at 12:45 PM on August 13, 2008
batshitinsane flamebait pony
...the new release from The Decemberists, available this October...
posted by katillathehun at 12:49 PM on August 13, 2008
...the new release from The Decemberists, available this October...
posted by katillathehun at 12:49 PM on August 13, 2008
armsevering tankburning dramaqueening navelgazing nitpicking ponywhispering pantsfishing
posted by quonsar at 12:52 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by quonsar at 12:52 PM on August 13, 2008
Mutual contacts have been editing tags on posts for over a year now. That's been working out, right? Are tag edits closely monitored now?
I use tags a lot, so it feels like this is the part of Metafilter with the least memory. See also, "What? Mutual contacts can edit tags?" threads one & two.
posted by Pronoiac at 12:53 PM on August 13, 2008 [1 favorite]
I use tags a lot, so it feels like this is the part of Metafilter with the least memory. See also, "What? Mutual contacts can edit tags?" threads one & two.
posted by Pronoiac at 12:53 PM on August 13, 2008 [1 favorite]
If you were going to do this right, MetaTalk tags would be created by the commenters and not the poster.
posted by eyeballkid at 12:59 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by eyeballkid at 12:59 PM on August 13, 2008
handcutting
posted by soundofsuburbia at 1:10 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by soundofsuburbia at 1:10 PM on August 13, 2008
Oops, missed "armsevering" there.
posted by soundofsuburbia at 1:11 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by soundofsuburbia at 1:11 PM on August 13, 2008
Considering you're all over virtually every metatalk post, usually with multiple replies, at extreme lengths, I find it hard to see how a few clicks on a couple X's to prune some inappropriate tags actually constitutes work.
Is this one of those situations where you were trying to make a neutral, helpful observation and it just accidentally reads like you're taking some sort of shot at me, or is this one of the actually-taking-a-shot-at-me comments?
People doing stupid things in tags causes headaches sometimes. Not a whole lot, not enough to make me think that adding tags to Metatalk is a bad idea by any stretch (see the rest of my comment), but it's a legit concern from our end. To reduce the time and energy that hijinks of any sort on the site cost us administratively to "a few clicks on a couple x's" is kind of off the mark, regardless.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:13 PM on August 13, 2008
Is this one of those situations where you were trying to make a neutral, helpful observation and it just accidentally reads like you're taking some sort of shot at me, or is this one of the actually-taking-a-shot-at-me comments?
People doing stupid things in tags causes headaches sometimes. Not a whole lot, not enough to make me think that adding tags to Metatalk is a bad idea by any stretch (see the rest of my comment), but it's a legit concern from our end. To reduce the time and energy that hijinks of any sort on the site cost us administratively to "a few clicks on a couple x's" is kind of off the mark, regardless.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:13 PM on August 13, 2008
I'd like to suggest a ceasefire between Dave Faris and cortex, until we can convene the UN.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:34 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:34 PM on August 13, 2008
Jeez, Dave Faris, part of cortex's job it to act as modertion brain trust, and optimize the ratio of time spent moderating and enjoyment gained from moderating for all three moderators. Every job has fun and less fun parts, and usually we do the fun parts first. If he starts complaining about "having" to participate in MeTa threads, then you'll have something. As it is, you're basically micromanaging someone who just works near you, not for you.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 1:40 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 1:40 PM on August 13, 2008
I'd like to suggest a ceasefire between Dave Faris and cortex, until we can convene the UN.
u.n. owen?
posted by desuetude at 1:43 PM on August 13, 2008 [2 favorites]
u.n. owen?
posted by desuetude at 1:43 PM on August 13, 2008 [2 favorites]
Considering you're all over virtually every metatalk post, usually with multiple replies, at extreme lengths, I find it hard to see how a few clicks on a couple X's to prune some inappropriate tags actually constitutes work.
Wow.
As with every moderation job we do here, anything multiplied by 100 and with the added scrutiny of people watching your every move ["why was my mathowiesux tag removed HE REALLY DOES SUCK?!" ] makes some of the things we do here seem simple on a good day and feel totally horrible on a bad day.
Removing a few inappropriate tags -- the clicking on the X's you refer to -- is actually simple. Determining which Xs to click, that's where the real work (sometimes) begins.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 1:48 PM on August 13, 2008
Wow.
As with every moderation job we do here, anything multiplied by 100 and with the added scrutiny of people watching your every move ["why was my mathowiesux tag removed HE REALLY DOES SUCK?!" ] makes some of the things we do here seem simple on a good day and feel totally horrible on a bad day.
Removing a few inappropriate tags -- the clicking on the X's you refer to -- is actually simple. Determining which Xs to click, that's where the real work (sometimes) begins.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 1:48 PM on August 13, 2008
The easiest solution that would anger everyone, of course, is to provide a preset vocabulary of useless tags. A veritable pull-down menu of AJAX inanity, yes.
I propose the following pointless MetaData options:
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:49 PM on August 13, 2008
I propose the following pointless MetaData options:
banana
manual
orange
batteries
particular
sanitation
starTrek
meat
cricket
fudgeposted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:49 PM on August 13, 2008
I find it hard to see...
Sometimes I find things hard to see because they're not actually there. But more often than not, it's just some shortcoming in my own perception.
posted by scottreynen at 1:50 PM on August 13, 2008
Sometimes I find things hard to see because they're not actually there. But more often than not, it's just some shortcoming in my own perception.
posted by scottreynen at 1:50 PM on August 13, 2008
u.n. owen?
To protect the Innocent Bystanders, yes.
Dave, I honestly cannot tell what you meant by that comment, but the way I put it was totally catty and I regret responding like I did. The second paragraph of my comment stands as written, though and on a day that has just been brimming with administrative headaches it's damned frustrating to get dealt another dose of Man Your Job Must Be Easy, doubly so in what did feel like a nasty backhand even if that wasn't your intent. Hence the grrr.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:51 PM on August 13, 2008
To protect the Innocent Bystanders, yes.
Dave, I honestly cannot tell what you meant by that comment, but the way I put it was totally catty and I regret responding like I did. The second paragraph of my comment stands as written, though and on a day that has just been brimming with administrative headaches it's damned frustrating to get dealt another dose of Man Your Job Must Be Easy, doubly so in what did feel like a nasty backhand even if that wasn't your intent. Hence the grrr.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:51 PM on August 13, 2008
The easiest solution that would anger everyone
Heh. I think this is a good brainstorming philosophy.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:54 PM on August 13, 2008
Heh. I think this is a good brainstorming philosophy.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:54 PM on August 13, 2008
Look, I'm not a stranger to being a moderator of online forums. I've been doing it for decades. It means doing all sorts of cleanup. Editing typos in titles. Fixing broken urls. Whatever. I see it more like pruning a bonsai. If each snip were like work, I'd find a different hobby.
posted by Dave Faris at 1:54 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by Dave Faris at 1:54 PM on August 13, 2008
I've never found a useful purpose for tags on the green or blue pages. Is there a way to search on tags?
posted by neuron at 1:55 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by neuron at 1:55 PM on August 13, 2008
We should have tag in MetaTalk.
*tags cortex* You're it; no tagbacks!
posted by Eideteker at 2:00 PM on August 13, 2008
*tags cortex* You're it; no tagbacks!
posted by Eideteker at 2:00 PM on August 13, 2008
Christ, now we have to implement freezies, doubletag, and blackjack no tagbacks?
posted by cortex (staff) at 2:05 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by cortex (staff) at 2:05 PM on August 13, 2008
Other tag searches from my browser history: garfield & legionofrockstars. Joyous.
posted by Pronoiac at 2:22 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by Pronoiac at 2:22 PM on August 13, 2008
We have tags. They're just limited.
Feature Requests
Bugs
Etiquette/Policy
Uptime
Metafilter-related
Meetups
posted by rooftop secrets at 2:29 PM on August 13, 2008
Feature Requests
Bugs
Etiquette/Policy
Uptime
Metafilter-related
Meetups
posted by rooftop secrets at 2:29 PM on August 13, 2008
Jack Kirby, king of comics? Actually if you look at “Users that often use this tag” it turns out that’s ME.
/Awaits Kirby-punch from beyond the grave.
posted by Artw at 2:31 PM on August 13, 2008
/Awaits Kirby-punch from beyond the grave.
posted by Artw at 2:31 PM on August 13, 2008
Dave doesn't like it when other people make money from the Internet.
posted by Maisie Jay at 2:35 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by Maisie Jay at 2:35 PM on August 13, 2008
One argument for tags in MetaTalk is that if you're every going to use the "similar questions" feature as a search tool for AskMe, it will let you search MeTa as well.
If you're never going to use "similar questions" as a search tool for AskMe, then don't read past the previous sentence.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 2:40 PM on August 13, 2008
If you're never going to use "similar questions" as a search tool for AskMe, then don't read past the previous sentence.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 2:40 PM on August 13, 2008
I'd like tags for metatalk so that I could see if topic X has been addressed before or not. Or so I could find a previous discussion on a topic to use as reference. Or to look up past meetup threads. I think (I hope) that we can all be adults and have the tags bring more pleasure than pain* for everyone. Maybe I'm too optimistic though.
*Yeah, I know some of you freaks are into the pain, but don't mean all of us need it. Rainbows, puppies, and hugs are the default, not whips, chains and snarky tags, right?
posted by iamkimiam at 3:48 PM on August 13, 2008
*Yeah, I know some of you freaks are into the pain, but don't mean all of us need it. Rainbows, puppies, and hugs are the default, not whips, chains and snarky tags, right?
posted by iamkimiam at 3:48 PM on August 13, 2008
We should have two tags: Fascist and Commie. There should be no explanation of what the implication is of one or the other. Everyone should have the ability to reset these tags for any post. We should also have a separate forum dedicated to threads arguing about whether a given post should be labeled Fascist or Commie, and about the etiquette of tag resetting. This would solve everything.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:03 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:03 PM on August 13, 2008
If you're never going to use "similar questions" as a search tool for AskMe, then don't read past the previous sentence.
Thanks for the tip. I almost wasted my time reading that second one.
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:16 PM on August 13, 2008
Thanks for the tip. I almost wasted my time reading that second one.
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:16 PM on August 13, 2008
Sexism Thread.
posted by turgid dahlia at 6:20 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by turgid dahlia at 6:20 PM on August 13, 2008
So I search for tags by URLing /tags/[tagiamlookingfor]?
posted by neuron at 7:48 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by neuron at 7:48 PM on August 13, 2008
No, just type [tagiamlookingfor] up in that search box up in the right corner. The results will include a range of attractively-tabbed options, including searching for that word by tags.
posted by yhbc at 8:07 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by yhbc at 8:07 PM on August 13, 2008
From left to right, in fact, they're "posts", "comments", "tags" and "users".
posted by yhbc at 8:09 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by yhbc at 8:09 PM on August 13, 2008
why was my mathowiesux tag removed HE REALLY DOES SUCK?!
posted by Kwine at 11:52 PM on August 13, 2008
posted by Kwine at 11:52 PM on August 13, 2008
you can have your u.n. owen if we can bring back Buck.
In fact, Zombie Buck Owens does sound like a great band
posted by waraw at 6:58 AM on August 14, 2008
In fact, Zombie Buck Owens does sound like a great band
posted by waraw at 6:58 AM on August 14, 2008
"Why should we have tags in MetaTalk?"
9622
Oh wait.
posted by grateful at 7:18 AM on August 14, 2008
9622
Oh wait.
posted by grateful at 7:18 AM on August 14, 2008
I vote for adding tags to MetaTalk because its over sixteen thousand proven threads represent a vast, untapped resource for our domestic backtagging industry. Reducing Metafilter's dependence on foreign threads will be essential in 2009 and beyond. Ask yourself: can we afford not to tag MetaTalk?
Also, it would probably be useful.
posted by mumkin at 12:44 AM on August 15, 2008
Also, it would probably be useful.
posted by mumkin at 12:44 AM on August 15, 2008
Yeah I think this will be one of those things we'll actually do, though it might take a while to get around to it.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:43 AM on August 15, 2008
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:43 AM on August 15, 2008
What's this we, honky?
posted by electroboy at 7:09 AM on August 15, 2008
posted by electroboy at 7:09 AM on August 15, 2008
If you're specifically calling out (or otherwise addressing, even complimenting) a specific user, I think it makes sense that their username should be a tag for the post, and also, that a MeFiMail should be sent to them to notify them of it.
Not that I care much for drama, but I think a that person has a right to know about drama involving them.
posted by aeschenkarnos at 11:26 PM on August 17, 2008
Not that I care much for drama, but I think a that person has a right to know about drama involving them.
posted by aeschenkarnos at 11:26 PM on August 17, 2008
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by Pronoiac at 10:49 AM on August 13, 2008