Comments on: Users are people too

Users are people too

infini — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:37:00 -0800

I'm tired of the word 'user'. can we use 'members' or 'readers' instead when referring to them e.g. "X users favourited this" etc?

i know its just semantics, but users are people too and as a member of the design profession the choice of words worries me sometimes. besides who wants to be known as a 'user'? Yah, this is a pet peeve

By: deern the headlice

deern the headlice — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:37:51 -0800

You need a hobby.

(Scrapbooking's fun)

By: Malor

Malor — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:39:34 -0800

I vote in favor of "$0 Freeloaders" and "$5 Suckers", respectively.

By: emhutchinson

emhutchinson — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:44:03 -0800

I couldn't agree with you more. As my husband, who does the occasional crossword puzzle, likes to point out, "four letter word for employer"= "user." He is self-employed, by the way.

By: StrikeTheViol

StrikeTheViol — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:44:47 -0800

Is this the thread where I can make "bucket of members" jokes?

By: timeistight

timeistight — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:45:48 -0800

Lusers?

By: StrikeTheViol

StrikeTheViol — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:46:51 -0800

Supplicants!

By: ludwig_van

ludwig_van — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:47:29 -0800

Constituents?

By: jouke

jouke — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:48:17 -0800

I'm just using mefi for my own gratification. The semantics are fine.

By: Astro Zombie

Astro Zombie — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:49:20 -0800

When I was in grade school, we used to call people who sort of glommed on to other people's popularity "users." It was said with real contempt as well, while sneering. Oh, that Shelley Finkelstein, he's such a user.

So I say we keep it.

By: infini

infini — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:52:15 -0800

beg to disagree, jouke, though it could be purely subjective since I'm supposed to be 'user centered' all day - meh, it gets too much to see it all over my playground too

By: jonmc

jonmc — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:53:32 -0800

You can call me 'Sex Symbol,' if you want.

By: It's Raining Florence Henderson

It's Raining Florence Henderson — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:53:36 -0800

inmates

By: infini

infini — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:56:20 -0800

humans

By: ook

ook — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:08:10 -0800

I'm tired of the term "website" because I see it at work all day. Can we please start referring to Metafilter as a Linky Bean Plate instead, because saying it ten times fast makes me giggle?

By: toomuchpete

toomuchpete — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:08:28 -0800

Your issues with the word "user" say more about you than they do MeFi.

By: BeerFilter

BeerFilter — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:08:46 -0800

What about all those websites that make you click on the SUBMIT button to get anything done? What are your feelings on that?

By: box

box — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:09:15 -0800

If it feels this good gettin' used, you just keep on usin' me until you use me up.

By: StrikeTheViol

StrikeTheViol — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:09:43 -0800

humans

But that discriminates against Astro Zombie! (Not to mention Pot and Kettle.)

By: Forktine

Forktine — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:10:01 -0800

If I claim that I could quit anytime, am I still a user?

By: infini

infini — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:14:50 -0800

does 'website' denigrate the human beings they are meant to be read by? distance them from their humanity, the equivalent of 'collateral damage' ?

By: box

box — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:16:10 -0800

Wait a minute, what's this about collateral damage? Did something happen to my five bucks?

By: HotPatatta

HotPatatta — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:20:20 -0800

"Users" isn't appropriate, I suppose. There are a lot more lurkers than users, so yes, "members" would be more accurate.

By: StrikeTheViol

StrikeTheViol — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:22:03 -0800

I think this thread needs eyeballkid.

By: tkolar

tkolar — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:26:56 -0800

“The word user is the word used by the computer professional when they mean idiot.” --Dave Barry

By: Sys Rq

Sys Rq — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:27:13 -0800

I think user is a fairly accurate descriptor; MetaFilter isn't very far removed from heroin.

By: Dagobert

Dagobert — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:29:50 -0800

Friends don't let friends Metafilter.

By: Meatbomb

Meatbomb — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:29:56 -0800

Q: You texty link person! Do you like using these pages?
A: I like it! I like using this linky text!
Q: Are you using these web pages as if it were your profession?
A: YES! I am using this text as a user, very much!

By: EndsOfInvention

EndsOfInvention — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:31:09 -0800

I'm tired of the word 'user'. can we use 'members' or 'readers' instead

I might "use" and "read" MetaFilter, but I sure as hell don't "memb" it.

By: Rhaomi

Rhaomi — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:32:06 -0800

I'm not getting the snarky backlash by some. Isn't it pretty accepted here that the otherwise-common reply convention of "@username" is Not Acceptable because of its abrupt and impersonal style? And that people who use it are often (informally) called out and told to use something else that doesn't get on everyone's nerves? In light of that, I don't see why changing "users" to something more personable is such a ridiculous idea, especially since it isn't forcing anyone to alter their behavior.

By: Fuzzy Skinner

Fuzzy Skinner — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:32:24 -0800

lusers. amirite.

By: Busithoth

Busithoth — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:35:03 -0800

Mefites?

By: Sailormom

Sailormom — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:36:47 -0800

members only.

By: Sys Rq

Sys Rq — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:36:56 -0800

I know it's just semantics, but users are people too; as a member of the design profession, the choice of words worries me sometimes. Besides, who wants to be known as a 'user'? Yeah, this is a pet peeve.

Guess my pet peeve.

"@username" is Not Acceptable

Because one does not talk at others.

By: ericb

ericb — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:43:22 -0800

Consumers.

By: Sailormom

Sailormom — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:43:53 -0800

We could all have matching jackets.

By: horsemuth

horsemuth — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:48:08 -0800

Isn't it pretty accepted here that the otherwise-common reply convention of "@username" is Not Acceptable because of its abrupt and impersonal style?
Well if anything, the style of my reply, which is common here, is more impersonal, as I am not even mentioning your username. It is however more readable, as other readers see the quoted text that I'm referencing instead of having to scroll back up to read what "username" wrote each time someone references a previous comment. Plus, that way looks stupid.

By: JaredSeth

JaredSeth — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:48:32 -0800

Gee, how about a system in which we determine what to call you based on an algorithm or favorites received and posts made? And other users can post feedback to your posts beyond just commenting on them, like A++ WOULD READ AGAIN? You'll get little logos you can put next to your name when you crest certain levels, like Power Poster?

JaredSeth (186) ⋆⋆

By: JaredSeth

JaredSeth — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:49:26 -0800

Oh and [NOT EBAY-IST]

By: horsemuth

horsemuth — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:50:37 -0800

Morlocks?

By: fixedgear

fixedgear — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:51:32 -0800

Associates.

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:53:21 -0800

Associates.

I just shorten it.

By: box

box — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:54:09 -0800

Well-wishers.

By: R. Mutt

R. Mutt — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:55:02 -0800

My Friends

By: nowonmai

nowonmai — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:04:47 -0800

Unique page impressors.

By: box

box — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:11:56 -0800

Eyeballs.

By: kittens for breakfast

kittens for breakfast — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:15:31 -0800

Huh huh. "Member."

By: katillathehun

katillathehun — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:18:14 -0800

Hey, I'm a member of the design profession, too! Let's be friends!!!

By: Dave Faris

Dave Faris — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:18:57 -0800

Gaping maws.

By: atrazine

atrazine — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:20:14 -0800

Well, gaping anyway

By: subbes

subbes — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:21:15 -0800

jessamyn: "I just shorten it."

Ah, Metafilter. With its happy ciates.

By: box

box — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:31:23 -0800

Soca!

By: Deathalicious

Deathalicious — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:39:35 -0800

GreaseMonkey to the rescue!

By: YoBananaBoy

YoBananaBoy — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:40:44 -0800

Was there ever a discussion of a the collective noun for mefites?

By: shmegegge

shmegegge — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:45:40 -0800

whiners.

By: hellojed

hellojed — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:47:17 -0800

I'm tired of the word comment, can't we use a different word such as "creative offering" or "accident" when referring to comments?

I know its just semantics, but comments are means of expression, and as a member of the expression profession the choice of words worries me sometimes. Besides, who wants their gift to the community to be known as a 'comment'? Yah, this is a pet peeve

By: ardgedee

ardgedee — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:53:21 -0800

> 'm tired of the word comment, can't we use a different word...?

You could call them 'underpants'. Like underpants, they can be shameful or provocative, interesting or repulsive, and they have the potential reveal more about you than you really intended to show.

By: fixedgear

fixedgear — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:55:50 -0800

What if you go commando?

By: Alvy Ampersand

Alvy Ampersand — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:56:55 -0800

A snark of MeFites.

By: milkrate

milkrate — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:06:04 -0800

a whinge of mefites
an ellipsis of mefites
a cooter of mefites

quarrel, prattle, thread, pileon

By: Justinian

Justinian — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:09:07 -0800

I like "user" because it makes me feel like TRON. I picture my little blue Mefi guy running around and killing your guys with his lightcycle. My little blue guy RULES.

By: ROU_Xenophobe

ROU_Xenophobe — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:10:38 -0800

If I knew that 129 members had favorited something, I would want to clean it very carefully before I touched it.

Because of all the semen.

By: ikkyu2

ikkyu2 — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:12:13 -0800

Yeah, to change this you'd pretty much have to hack the Master Control Program cone.

By: koeselitz

koeselitz — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:19:24 -0800

Y'know what pisses me off, infini? You come in here, you do this annoying thing where you don't capitalize or punctuate and you announce yourself as "a member of the design profession" (huh?) all in a few sentences, and then you complain about wanting to change a word because you don't like how it feels, which, I've gotta tell you, is just about the most annoying thing in the world to me. If I have to read one more obnoxious euphemism that's been cleverly invented to circumvent the painful confrontation of something difficult, I think I'll hit somebody. So what I want most is to tell you to shove it, that I want words plain, and that they shouldn't be mucked with.

The thing that pisses me off is the fact that you're right. "Users" isn't really correct, and it sounds stupid, too. "People" is right. There's no need to go reaching for "valued members" or "esteemed contributors" or some such bullshit. "People" is right, it's to the point, and it's succinct.

So, yeah, it's annoying, but you're absolutely right. I think this should change.

By: 6:1

6:1 — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:19:40 -0800

Addicts

By: Alvy Ampersand

Alvy Ampersand — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:26:12 -0800

"Youse guys"

By: CKmtl

CKmtl — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:27:50 -0800

GreaseMonkey to the rescue!

Now you too can experience the fun and whimsy of OneNewsNow-style search-and-replace tactics! Look forward to such smirk-inducing moments as:

"Damn those Townhoreaders, and their quaint door decorations!"
"MeFiMusicians, what are your thoughts on Transfmember?"
"HOPE ME! My Mounderpants has horrible hairballs!"

By: Pronoiac

Pronoiac — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:33:30 -0800

Hm. I think I use the terms "Mefites" or "members."

Hey, what are people who reset the cooter clock? "Schmucks" or "asshats?" I'm leaning towards "schmuck."

By: gauchodaspampas

gauchodaspampas — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:36:55 -0800

'Readers' wouldn't work either, because ideally, members contribute too. Members is okay, because it doesn't imply a one way relation. But it doesn't really say anything about the relationship between mefi and the member. It doesn't say what we do, except, 'be members'. Agreed though, that users has the same problem of 'readers'. It's not web 2.0-y enough. Meh. The problem is, words that try too hard to be web 2.0-y suck. And I can't think of a suitable word that existed before web 2.0 that accurately describes the 2 way interaction between members and the site/other members.

By: madamjujujive

madamjujujive — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:43:16 -0800

Don't pretend you didn't see the "Metafilter: More addictive than crack" warnings. You paid your $5 and took your chances just like the rest of us. Face the sad and sordid facts, baby, you are a user, plain and simple. Cute trick with the "member" BS, but euphemisms won't get you anywhere - that's just another form of denial.

By: katillathehun

katillathehun — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:49:38 -0800

meh, it gets too much to see it all over my playground too

Every time a "meh" is uttered, an angel gets its wings CAUGHT IN A TURBINE.

By: Wolfdog

Wolfdog — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:54:48 -0800

"Puppies."

By: The Great Big Mulp

The Great Big Mulp — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:58:59 -0800

a whinge of mefites
an ellipsis of mefites
a cooter of mefites

I thought it was a beanplate of mefites.
(or a blazecock pileon of mefiltes)

By: tkolar

tkolar — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:01:57 -0800

Every time a "meh" is uttered, an angel gets its wings CAUGHT IN A TURBINE.

HD High Speed video requested.

By: jmd82

jmd82 — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:08:02 -0800

I agree with koeselitz. People who can't capitalize in the most remedial of gramatical situations piss me off. Next please.

By: lukemeister

lukemeister — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:14:41 -0800

Soy un perdidor
I'm a user, baby, so why don't you kill me?

By: Busithoth

Busithoth — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:20:21 -0800

'NEEERRRDDDSSS!!!!' ?

By: carsonb

carsonb — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:23:32 -0800

People who dismiss others based on their chosen aesthetic rather than the merits of their ideas piss me off. Next please.

People who vulgarly descry the offense of their delicate sensibilities by others in public evoke my intolerance. Moving along.

People who generalize affect my emotional balance, which worries my perception of control over my own waking life. Mommy!

By: ROU_Xenophobe

ROU_Xenophobe — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:33:04 -0800

Every time a "meh" is uttered, an angel gets its wings CAUGHT IN A TURBINE.

Seeing as how I already have popcorn:

meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh meh

Oooooh. Better than the compressed air wiener-dog gun.

By: Brandon Blatcher

Brandon Blatcher — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:34:40 -0800

I just shorten it.

Associates.

Goddamn narks.

By: Sys Rq

Sys Rq — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:39:54 -0800

Associates --> Socs

Stay gold, jessamyn.

By: grouse

grouse — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:41:24 -0800

I agree with koeselitz.

By: djgh

djgh — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:42:33 -0800

Well, I think that from a design perspective we should be look at what image we're trying to project with the collective noun for us. I mean, what is the image we want other people to have of us? These are the important questions, people.

ASIDE Marty, can you grab me a tall mocha? Great, thanks.

*Struts around boardroom table*

Let's brainstorm? What have we got?

*Writes spoken contributions on flipchart*

Great, this is all gold people.

*Pushes black framed rectangular glasses back onto bridge of his nose*

However, I think you're thinking too small. Too inside the box when we should be thinking outside the box. We need to shift the paradigm of what we expect to be addressed by.

I suggest *pause* usr. Think about it.

Like user, but without the 'e'! It's genius! What's more, it reflects on MetaFilter (or MtFltr, as it's soon to be known) as a place both invested in the past of the internet - think command line! - and in the future. Look at the success of places like Flickr. No 'e' equals profit!

Now, moving on to changing to a white background with rounded corners...

By: ORthey

ORthey — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:44:16 -0800

How about yoozer?

By: Brandon Blatcher

Brandon Blatcher — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:05:04 -0800

I mean, what is the image we want other people to have of us?

HAWT, but wears underwear.

By: dg

dg — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:05:36 -0800

Sys Rq: "
"@username" is Not Acceptable
Because one does not talk at others."

All evidence here to the contrary.

By: krautland

krautland — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:23:39 -0800

how about "friends" or "humans" or "people" or "men and women" or ... no, let's just stick to users.

By: Artw

Artw — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:25:07 -0800

"client"... "partner"...

By: kuujjuarapik

kuujjuarapik — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:32:10 -0800

johns.

By: goodnewsfortheinsane

goodnewsfortheinsane — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:32:28 -0800

Only users need hugs.

By: Artw

Artw — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:35:31 -0800

"loyal subjects"

By: lukemeister

lukemeister — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:36:41 -0800

djgh,
Stop the disenvoweling, unless you want to tear open the wound again. Do we really want to see mathowi, jssamyn, and cortx stripped of the most commonly used letter in the English language?

By: Artw

Artw — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:37:19 -0800

"carbon based units"

By: blue_beetle

blue_beetle — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:39:53 -0800

revenue generation units.

By: Artw

Artw — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:41:21 -0800

We're all batteries, just like in the matrix, however the fuck that was supposed to work...

By: stet

stet — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:47:05 -0800

"motherfuckers"

Either that or "Metafiltroons." Whichever.

By: Artw

Artw — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:54:01 -0800

"Arugula munchers"

By: blasdelf

blasdelf — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:03:27 -0800

"patrons"

By: Dave Faris

Dave Faris — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:05:53 -0800

Special snowflakes.

By: kaibutsu

kaibutsu — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:06:32 -0800

You mean... MorthrFuckrs.

By: jack_mo

jack_mo — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:06:56 -0800

koeselitz: ""People" is right."

I think so. Being called a 'user' isn't quiite as bad as being called a 'customer' instead of a passenger by the conductor on a post-privatisation train, but it does rankle a tiny bit. Nothing compared to time I was asked to fill in a 'stakeholder' questionnaire when I was in fact a fucking patient in a hospital, mind - my outrage at that piece of newspeak bollocks was powerful enough to snap me right out of the lovely morphine nod I was enjoying at the time. Thanks for that, New Labour spincocks.

By: Meatbomb

Meatbomb — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:12:08 -0800

HAWT, but wears underwear.

Speak for yourself, Brandon.

By: cortex

cortex — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:12:39 -0800

In defense of the term, because, hey, why not:

At some point in the maybe-not-too-far-flung future, it may not be so clearly obvious, or at least conspicuous, that things like community weblogs and social platforms and conversational applications are computer programs running on computers that we interact with by typing on keyboards.

At that point, the functional sensibility of "user" as a term connoting the use of or interaction with some kind of engineered object or application will probably start to break down. But right now, that you're explicitly using the functionality provided by Metafilter—not just reading the site but doing things granted to you as a privileged accessor of the commenting and posting and flagging and favoriting and etc. systems the site extends to you—is a pretty immediately accessible idea, and one driven by a long tradition in social computing.

Of course you're a member; of course you're a person, and a mefite. But you don't mefi the site, or memberize it or personize it: you use it. Mefi is a community of people, but that's an emergent property, and what it emerges from is the core functionality of the site, the channels of communication in various directions that the programming provides. So the taxonomical argument for "user" in those contexts where use is being described is pretty sound.

Now, when I'm talking about mefi in some specific social context, I say "mefite" and "member" and "lurker" and "reader"; I talk about people I've met and people I only know form their words here; I discuss the community, and how it differs from other communities and what kinds of interpersonal interactions emerge from where and by whom and so on.

But beneath all of that, we're all users logged into the same system.

By: Artw

Artw — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:15:21 -0800

Winners don't use.

By: XMLicious

XMLicious — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:18:49 -0800

I vote for ☺s. Perhaps accompanied by a few hearts and stars and prancing unicorn icons. If you made the stars blink, it would seem like they're twinkling.

By: Brandon Blatcher

Brandon Blatcher — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:33:36 -0800

But you don't mefi the site

Speak for yourself cortex.

By: klarck

klarck — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:48:59 -0800

A former employer had a 3 month contest to come up with an alternative to the word "employee" for use in intracompany communications. The winning entry was "colleague". The word "employer" was retained for regular use though.

By: kittyprecious

kittyprecious — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:55:11 -0800

PEOPLE USE MEFI. IT HAS MANY USES. WHEN ONE USES THE WORD USER, OTHERS UNDERSTAND IT.

But I'd go with "USians," just to piss off the foreigners.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:02:14 -0800

I wanna spread the news that if it feels this good getting used
Oh you just keep on using me until you use me up...

By: Forktine

Forktine — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:05:29 -0800

But I'd go with "USians," just to piss off the ~~foreigners~~ people who care about language.

By: drjimmy11

drjimmy11 — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:06:06 -0800

semi-computer nerd joke: my boss was trying to decide what caption to put next to a number that showed how many users of our product had participated in a certain discussion.

Since we had an array that listed all the members who had participated, he proposed "member length."

By: drjimmy11

drjimmy11 — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:07:34 -0800

But I'd go with "USians," just to piss off ~~the foreigners people who care about language~~ everyone in the universe except like 8 people who still think it's clever or meaningful.

By: Artw

Artw — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:49:25 -0800

"white middle class males"

By: winna

winna — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:49:57 -0800

I work for a company that recently changed the title of about 90% of our workforce to something so gratuitously condescending it makes me froth every time I see it on a piece of documentation. The following is largely based on how furious that change makes me.

I like user! It's honest! It's not smarmy! It doesn't attempt to conceal my real relationship with the site under a bunch of feel-good nonsense which purports to value people by assuming that they are so fragile they can't recognize that the strong anthropic principle does not refer directly to them!

By: Cranberry

Cranberry — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 17:02:32 -0800

"I vote for ☺s. Perhaps accompanied by a few hearts and stars and prancing unicorn icons. If you made the stars blink, it would seem like they're twinkling.
posted by XMLicious at 3:18 PM on August 24"

Excellent suggestion! *♥*♥*♥*♥* unless the blink tag no longer works.

By: Dave Faris

Dave Faris — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 17:05:55 -0800

Sycophants and sops.

By: turgid dahlia

turgid dahlia — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 17:14:48 -0800

Comrades.

By: fixedgear

fixedgear — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 17:18:12 -0800

SME

By: bru

bru — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 18:26:56 -0800

beneath all of that, we're all users logged into the same system

Spoken as a true programmer: you are seeing the machine.
"User" is okay anyway, but I think infini has a point: you "use" a service, and we are using the service provided by the engine that runs Metafilter.
But readers are also using Metafilter.
So it could be said that "user" covers readers as well as people who post.
Posting is a privilege reserved to members.
So "members" are a special class of "users": those who can participate.
So calling people who post "members" is more precise.

By: spaceman_spiff

spaceman_spiff — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 20:18:57 -0800

User? But I hardly know 'er!

By: infini

infini — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 20:31:58 -0800

k, after reading the reasoned arguments sprinkled in this thread, i'll go with what cortex says and never complain again ;p though I do appreciate what koesilitz has written

however, just to make my point, else I wouldn't be using MeFi like the addict I am, the word user, particularly when its used less for people using online or s/w stuff and more when its for tangible products - take the swiffer for example or some such - has a tendency among designers to make them overlook the fact that ultimately its real people who have to use the product, yes, they are users, but the word often makes them seem like remote entities who are part of a demographic rather than human beings with hopes and dreams and aspirations

kinda what leads to mainstream consumer culture telling you that you're a luser without an iPhone

just imho

(ps. I use yah cos I say yah not yeah, i prefer no grammar or punctuation for my online textual communications)

By: iamkimiam

iamkimiam — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 20:45:01 -0800

You know what? Semantic nerds are people too! Nothing subverts my metaphor more than some filter user that comes along and reduces my entire world to a "just". And for prescriptivist purposes no less! I haven't been dragging my trochees up a hill covered with any of one of the 1000 words for snow to read you write, "I know its just semantics, but..."

So yeah, next time, watch your language. With your fingers.

By: longsleeves

longsleeves — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 00:18:32 -0800

k after reading the reasoned arguments sprinkled in this thread ill go with what cortex says and never complain again p though I do appreciate what koesilitz has written

however just to make my point else I wouldnt be using MeFi like the addict I am the word user particularly when its used less for people using online or sw stuff and more when its for tangible products take the swiffer for example or some such has a tendency among designers to make them overlook the fact that ultimately its real people who have to use the product yes they are users but the word often makes them seem like remote entities who are part of a demographic rather than human beings with hopes and dreams and aspirations

kinda what leads to mainstream consumer culture telling you that youre a luser without an iPhone

just imho

ps I use yah cos I say yah not yeah i prefer no grammar or punctuation for my online textual communications

FTFY (The puntcuation, I mean - I'm not sure how to eliminate grammar. Maybe by randomly reshuffling the words?)

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 05:44:27 -0800

I wanna spread the news
that if it feels this good getting used
just keep on using me
until you use me up

By: ardgedee

ardgedee — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 05:46:20 -0800

> the word user, particularly when its used less for people using online or s/w stuff and more when its for tangible products ... has a tendency among designers to make them overlook the fact that ultimately its real people who have to use the product

On the contrary. In design and technology professions, 'user' is more specific than 'person. 'Person' is ambiguous; it could mean the user, or the admin, or a spectator. 'User' designates the specific person engaged in the task of posting/commenting/reading. It's not the most humanizing of words, on the surface, but the meaning of 'user' as used here is sufficiently common by now even among people outside the design trade -- and outside of Metafilter -- that you'll have a hard time dislodging it. Tech jargon tends to assimilate rapidly in online forums, partly because the geeks are mingling about and using the terms.

> (ps. I use yah cos I say yah not yeah, i prefer no grammar or punctuation for my online textual communications)

You're using grammar whether you intend to or not, but expect to be tweaked frequently for writing in a hybrid SMS/chatforum style.

By: gleuschk

gleuschk — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 06:18:31 -0800

that if it feels this good getting used
just keep on using me
until you use me up

Three times isn't enough for that reference. Could we have four?

By: Mister_A

Mister_A — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 07:13:08 -0800

Has anyone nominated "Asshat" to replace user? If not, consider this a nomination.

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 07:13:46 -0800

Three times isn't enough for that reference. Could we have four?

Here's two more, bringing it to five for you, gleuschk:

I'm a user...
I'm a user...
And I'm not what I appear to be...

By: languagehat

languagehat — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 07:14:52 -0800

Waiter, I'm tired of these beans. Take them to the user at the next table and bring me some pancakes. Thanks!

By: The Light Fantastic

The Light Fantastic — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 07:19:07 -0800

(ps. I use yah cos I say yah not yeah, i prefer no grammar or punctuation for my online textual communications)

Oof...that's hard to read.

By: penduluum

penduluum — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 07:50:24 -0800

(ps. I use yah cos I say yah not yeah, i prefer no grammar or punctuation for my online textual communications)

If you said "yah" to me instead of "yeah" in a face-to-face conversation I would probably have to spend at least a few seconds determining what you were trying to say. Therefore I would argue that your attempt to make communication more efficient (that is why you're doing this, right?) by stripping away such affectations as grammar or punctuation or, you know, recognizable words, is actually making you harder to communicate with.

Just something to consider as you go about your day.

By: TheOnlyCoolTim

TheOnlyCoolTim — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 07:57:19 -0800

At some point in the maybe-not-too-far-flung future, it may not be so clearly obvious, or at least conspicuous, that things like community weblogs and social platforms and conversational applications are computer programs running on computers that we interact with by typing on keyboards.

The Singularity: Will You Use It, or Will It Use You?

(Malevolent AI in my exocortex? It's more likely than you think.)

By: quin

quin — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:17:33 -0800

Dave Faris : Sycophants and sops.

This is good, but I think that we could make it even better;

12 obsequious sycophants marked this as a favorite:

Yeah, that's got the right tone. The one that makes you feel, just a little bit, like an evil overlord.

'Toadying lackey' would also be acceptable.

By: yhbc

yhbc — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:27:17 -0800

Yowzers.

By: infini

infini — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:01:53 -0800

how about "Ya" then for the sound that emerges ? Its not really a "yeah" tbh

By: Pronoiac

Pronoiac — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:03:06 -0800

How do you pronounce yah, anyway? On preview: Yaw?

iamkimiam: I haven't been dragging my trochees up a hill covered with any of one of the 1000 words for snow to read you write, "I know its just semantics, but..."

Training montage! I was hoping you weren't quoting & you put in "its" just to make a point, but nooooo. Without grammar, punctuation, or semantics, what is left? Markov?

By: inigo2

inigo2 — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:09:40 -0800

GET HIM A BODY BAG, YAH!

By: jouke

jouke — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:18:32 -0800

yah, yaw, ya; you poor confused anglophones. Subconsciously you're looking for something but don't know what.
You're looking for the Dutch/German/Danish/Swedish/Norwegian affirmative ja of course. One word and it will serve you right all over north Europe.

I seem to remember that the British royal family, which used to be called Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha before WWI, uses yah as an affirmative as a remnant of the German descent of queen Victoria.
I'm not sure whether that's true.

By: koeselitz

koeselitz — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:24:24 -0800

infini: how about "Ya" then for the sound that emerges ? Its not really a "yeah" tbh

Well, that's true. But it's not really "rig-heh-tuh," either, it's "rah-ee-t," but conventionally we spell the word "right," probably because of some ridiculous Welsh influence centuries ago. "Yeah" is a conventional spelling.

And I don't mind - you can spell it any way you wish - but you should be warned that every time I read someone who's written "yah," I expect the next interjection to be "eh," and I hear everything they type sounding just like the McKenzie brothers. "Yah" looks like it should be pronounced "y-aaahh," long 'a' sound.

I actually think "yeah" is a pretty good rendering, phonetically. When you slow down and take out the dipthong, just pronouncing each vowel, "ye-ah," it sounds a bit more languid, almost Texan, but it closely approximates what it sounds like from the rest of us, I think.

The trouble seems to be that there's no character for the nasal 'a' in English. Every time you write a simple 'a,' it usually gets read as a long or short 'a,' not the nasal 'a' of "yeaaah!" So I think you're stuck with the odd ways we've come up with for writing that sound.

By: cortex

cortex — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:30:02 -0800

Dowwww dowt dowt.
Chicka-chick-ahhhh.
Ohhhh yæh.

By: cortex

cortex — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:33:28 -0800

One word and it will serve you right all over north Europe.

Alas: in American pop culture, "ja" is strongly, maybe irrevocably bounded to (in maybe roughly equal shares) evil-and/or-cartoonish Nazis and contemporary, friendly, Beemer-manufacturing Germans. Plus there's the issue of Jah Rasta riffage confusing the phonetic connotations as well.

By: cortex

cortex — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:35:00 -0800

Note that the above was found while rummaging through some old files that I store in my ass. Consult your doctor before changing medication. Void where prohibited.

By: cortex

cortex — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:35:52 -0800

You know, "void where prohibited" can be parsed as incitement to poop illegally. That might not be such a great thing to tack on to legal disclaimers.

By: ardgedee

ardgedee — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:37:57 -0800

> You're looking for the Dutch/German/Danish/Swedish/Norwegian affirmative ja of course. One word and it will serve you right all over north Europe.

Glad to oblige, yah sure, you betcha, but we're over here and not over there. Stuck in the woods you might say, don't'cha know.

By: Pronoiac

Pronoiac — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:36:31 -0800

The Minnesotan ja from Fargo beats out German connotations, I think.

By: jouke

jouke — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:36:46 -0800

but we're over here and not over there
That's right. And your use of yah/ya/yaw betrays a secret longing for to be over here. I've see these symptoms quite often with my other patients.

By: jouke

jouke — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:41:15 -0800

That sounds rather probable Pronoiac; looking at the high percentage of German and Scandinavian ancestry in Minnesota (according to Wikipedia that is).

So, cortex, they're no nazis, they're Minnesotans.

By: cortex

cortex — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:52:05 -0800

Ah, but the Minnesotan Oh Yah is, you know, a distinctly Minnesotan artifact; it's not really in the running for general usage outside of folks with that dialectal upbringing, and was played for laughs in e.g. Fargo.

So it's definitely in the phonetic pop-culture mix—consider my Nazi/BMW/Reggae theory amended—but still doesn't work as a secret-Euro-yearning argument. If I wanted to make a serious argument about the existence of "yah" and "ya" as common renderings of "yeah", I'd chalk it up to people being incapable of agreeing on the morphological representation of slangy casual speech.

Or, to restructure that as a bar bet: twenty bucks says that an unbiased survey of the pronunciation of "yeah" token by non-Minnesotan Americans who spell it "yah" or "ya" would show that at least eighty percent of them pronounce it like "yeah", not "ja". Finding out that I'm totally wrong about this would be worth that twenty bucks to me, but I doubt I'll have the chance to lose it.

By: Iamtherealme

Iamtherealme — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:00:20 -0800

Users are losers, and losers are users.

By: TheOnlyCoolTim

TheOnlyCoolTim — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:47:29 -0800

Users are losers, and losers are users.

YouTube on antidrug PSAs:

This video may not be suitable for minors.

By: Pronoiac

Pronoiac — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:37:53 -0800

I thought the reggae one was Jah, pronounced jaw, for Jahweh?

And "ya" is most likely used for "you." "Hey Ya" notwithstanding. Wait, which "ya" is used in "Hey Ya?"

So you picture someone wandering around with a sign: "Do you use these words to say yes: 'yah' or 'ya?'"

...

In asking officemates about "Hey Ya," one admits to using "ya" for "yeah" in text messaging.

By: dg

dg — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:10:26 -0800

infiniPoster: "... (ps. I use yah cos I say yah not yeah, i prefer no grammar or punctuation for my online textual communications)"

Of course, you won't mind if every sane human subconsciously subtracts 100 IQ points from you in parsing what you write, will you? Personally, I just assume that people who refuse to use correct punctuation or spelling do so because they don't know how - this saves (me) time and is invariably confirmed over time.

By: grouse

grouse — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:12:17 -0800

you won't mind if every sane human subconsciously subtracts 100 IQ points from you in parsing what you write, will you?

That's way harsh, dg. More like 50 IQ points.

By: Crabby Appleton

Crabby Appleton — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 15:01:25 -0800

"dupes". Same number of letters, forms the plural in the same way. You can make the change with a binary editor. You're welcome.

By: arcanecrowbar

arcanecrowbar — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 15:55:21 -0800

In reference to the membership fee, I suggest that users be called "Lincolns".

By: desjardins

desjardins — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:21:50 -0800

In asking officemates about "Hey Ya," one admits to using "ya" for "yeah" in text messaging.

"ya" is commonly used for yes or yeah in the upper midwest. Think Fargo.

By: wendell

wendell — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:49:53 -0800

Woah, 150 comments and nobody brought up the term "abuser"?

Well, then I will. I am a MetaFilter abuser. (Just ask the mods.) Have been since the first day the street-corner blog pusher gave me a free sample. I did spend some time in offline rehab, but it didn't take. I'm hooked, and frankly, I'm happy.

And there IS a Cabal; at last count, it has over 78,000 members, including a lot of 'silent partners'. So let's call ourselves The Cabalists. (unless that sounds too much like Kaballah).

Other designation suggestions:

FOMs (Firends Of Mathowie)

MetaTologists.

The Aristocrats.

Gangstahs. (Double-posters are Unoriginal Gangstahs)

Mobsters. (or MetaMobsters)

Clubbers.

The Emailing List.

Imaginary Friends.

Dorks.

The Damned.

Mes-Who-Get-Asked.

Filterers.

Flitterers. (hey, if Matt ever wants to set up a competitor for Twitter...)

Masons is taken, but we can be the Masonjars, Masondixons, Marshamasons, Masonadams (my fave) or Stonecutters. (although we are closer to Shriners)

Citizens.

Shareholders (or Holdsharers).

or just Victims.

By: wendell

wendell — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:31:17 -0800

Hello? Anybody here? I got more...

Snarkers.

Mutual Enemies.

Huddled Masses (or Muddled Asses).

Followers (or MetaFollowers).

Apostles, Disciples or other religious connotations.

Partners (or Pardners or Pahdnahs).

Little Rascals (an alternative to Gang references).

Assembled Multitudes.

Focus Group (or Focus Groupies).

Or just Groupies, Groupers or Groupsters.

I even posted about this on my own NEW blog (blatant self-link)

By: The Light Fantastic

The Light Fantastic — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:53:35 -0800

Jets

By: misha

misha — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 19:30:25 -0800

No, Jets won't work, because when you're a jet, you're a jet all the way from your first cigarette to you last dying day...and that means no more flame-outs.

Thetans.

Then we never have to worry about Tom Cruise joining.

By: misha

misha — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 19:31:25 -0800

YOUR last dying day. Please hide me from languagehat.

By: wendell

wendell — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 01:04:08 -0800

I said "Snarks", not "Sharks"...

You can hide behind me, misha, I'm a big target. But sometimes a kmart.

By: infini

infini — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 02:17:14 -0800

for those correcting my pronounciation, go look at the individual in the profile page and decide if said person would pronounce English, American, or even Yee Ha correctly, hmm?

By: infini

infini — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 02:18:55 -0800

dg - your point helps, i become lax outside of when i'm writing formally but had never stopped to think how and what my 'textual' persona conveyed.

By: infini

infini — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 02:43:16 -0800

What also struck me was that while I may have posted this request on MetaTalk on an impulse, the conversation since then has not reflected well on me. I do apologize for that.

By: koeselitz

koeselitz — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 09:16:55 -0800

infini: ... the conversation since then has not reflected well on me. I do apologize for that.

Huh? This is how it works in MeTa - someone posts something, and then everybody else takes turns bashing their skull. Doesn't matter who, doesn't matter what they post. It certainly didn't seem to matter here.

All snarking to the contrary, you didn't do anything to provoke it. We are equipped with internet spleens - the kind that require frequent venting. If it wasn't your grammar or punctuation, it would've been your username, how many comments you've made, you shoe size, etc.

Don't worry, friend. It's the modern malaise. It's the contemporary cynicism. It's not you. Seriously. It's us being assholes.

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 09:56:20 -0800

Hey, koeselitz is right. It's the modern Malays. Buncha snarkers.

By: jouke

jouke — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 12:47:26 -0800

Cortex: would show that at least eighty percent of them pronounce it like "yeah", not "ja".
Apparently you have a very definite idea of how "ja" is pronounced. Since the default English pronounciation "dya" isn't relevant I suppose you're thinking of a German like pronounciation.
But that's just one language of the five I mentioned. The english "yah" easily fits into that fonological continuum of those five.

I must say; your bar bets sound rather nuanced (80%) and hard to prove. Are you drinking enough? Here, let me get you a beer.

No, jouke isn't pronounced "djooky" either

By: cortex

cortex — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:11:26 -0800

A bar bet that doesn't lead to arguments over ambiguity and provability isn't a bar bet worth artificially prolonging the conversation by making.

Scotch, please. I'm on a diet.

By: Pronoiac

Pronoiac — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:20:36 -0800

I'm still wondering infini pronounces "yah."

By: team lowkey

team lowkey — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:45:38 -0800

Me too. For the purposes of cortex's bet, I'm assuming "yeah" is pronounced with the "a" in cat, and "ja" is pronounced with the "a" in car. I'd agree that most people would pronounce "yah" like "ja", but it's all very confusing.

Does "yes" share origins with "ja"? Because it sounds like "yeah" is most likely "yes" with the "s" dropped, and not a drift from "ja". Minnesotans are surely using a Scandinavian style "ja", but that seems pretty unrelated to the rest of the country's "yeah".

By: Artw

Artw — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:22:08 -0800

"Sugartits"

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:36:36 -0800

"pencildick"

By: Artw

Artw — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:46:47 -0800

For extra lulz the users gender would be parsed and the least applicable of that pair would be used.

By: Artw

Artw — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:48:13 -0800

Yes, I know, I'm leaving out "Other" and "Declined to identify".

By: lukemeister

lukemeister — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 18:05:28 -0800

Sweetie

By: lukemeister

lukemeister — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 18:06:26 -0800

But wait! There's more!

By: infini

infini — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 23:37:26 -0800

I know koeselitz, I know and i'd have enjoyed teh banter if the rest of my world hadn't come crashing down around me just after I posted this

meh, yah, and *snarks at self*

By: The Light Fantastic

The Light Fantastic — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 23:47:52 -0800

Dude/Dudette

By: notashroom

notashroom — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 14:05:26 -0800

Filtrates?
Sediments?
Peers?
Snookums?

As for the collective noun, I think milkrate has it: a pileon of MeFites.