Online personality tests in NYT January 17, 2002 10:01 PM Subscribe
The New York Times' Online Diary (scroll down to "I'm Paul!"): Online personality tests are a long-running Web "meme," or viral idea. No mention of MeFi, or how agonizing tests are, or ways to cure people's obsession with the danged things, but you can't have everything, I guess. [Login: metafi/metafi; pony not included.]
Oh, yeah, nothing from the NYT ever gets posted to MeFi!
Personally, I'd rather have the tittering giddiness over the long-mummified "What Kind of X Are You?" test theme than the ongoing irrational insistence that MeFi is for some reason is a news source. I have plenty of places to get serious news from, and the web is absolutely teeming with people who want to share their political views. But that's an individual preference, and the will of the people seems to be against me on it.
In terms of pet peeves, I'd like to see the Obscure Store "golly, ain't that weird?" reposts take a hike, too, but I doubt that'll happen any time soon.
posted by majick at 10:18 PM on January 17, 2002
Personally, I'd rather have the tittering giddiness over the long-mummified "What Kind of X Are You?" test theme than the ongoing irrational insistence that MeFi is for some reason is a news source. I have plenty of places to get serious news from, and the web is absolutely teeming with people who want to share their political views. But that's an individual preference, and the will of the people seems to be against me on it.
In terms of pet peeves, I'd like to see the Obscure Store "golly, ain't that weird?" reposts take a hike, too, but I doubt that'll happen any time soon.
posted by majick at 10:18 PM on January 17, 2002
i noticed this a few weeks ago, but i suppose i should mention it now. i can't get into the nytimes website with metafi/metafi anymore. (they have spies!) but i suppose that answers the collective question re: do they care? i'll miss metafi.
posted by moz at 10:26 PM on January 17, 2002
posted by moz at 10:26 PM on January 17, 2002
I think personality test are bound to pop up on MetaFilter, simply because the main posting participants all have some degree "hey dig me!" extrovert to `em, and replying in these threads allows one to scratch that itch without being too obvious about it.
By the way, I'm a cancer, I hate small dogs, and chicks as a species should wear more gingham.
posted by dong_resin at 2:13 AM on January 18, 2002
By the way, I'm a cancer, I hate small dogs, and chicks as a species should wear more gingham.
posted by dong_resin at 2:13 AM on January 18, 2002
I really want to take that Paul test. I am Paul, and would like to know what percentage of me is Paul.
posted by hijinx at 5:46 AM on January 18, 2002
posted by hijinx at 5:46 AM on January 18, 2002
And, I think that bitching and whining about personality test[s] are bound to pop up on MetaFilter MetaTalk, simply because the main posting participants all have some degree "hey dig me!" extrovert to `em plus a momentarily overweening sense of their own moral superiority, more or less--not to mention crankiness in general--and replying in these threads allows one to scratch that itch without being too obvious about it.
posted by y2karl at 8:24 AM on January 18, 2002
posted by y2karl at 8:24 AM on January 18, 2002
Translation: I should get to post whatever I want on to MetaFilter, and those who disagree with me are bitchy, whiny, self-superior cranks. Matt doesn't actually want us to self-police, or, if he does, he is wrong.
posted by Skot at 8:39 AM on January 18, 2002
posted by Skot at 8:39 AM on January 18, 2002
Oh, puh-leeze--must I put a stupid ';)' on it for humorless you to get the joke?
posted by y2karl at 9:23 AM on January 18, 2002
posted by y2karl at 9:23 AM on January 18, 2002
Whatever.
As long as the chicks begin to get with the gingham.
I've got a Dorothy fetish thing going, here.
posted by dong_resin at 9:59 AM on January 18, 2002
As long as the chicks begin to get with the gingham.
I've got a Dorothy fetish thing going, here.
posted by dong_resin at 9:59 AM on January 18, 2002
Oh, puh-leeze--must I put a stupid ';)' on it for humorless you to get the joke?
Sorry, I guess I'm used to funny jokes. My bad.
posted by Skot at 10:06 AM on January 18, 2002
Sorry, I guess I'm used to funny jokes. My bad.
posted by Skot at 10:06 AM on January 18, 2002
Sorry, I guess I'm used to funny jokes--as opposed to terminally self-righteous, Matt-invoking--rejoinders, myself. My bad 2. ;Þ
posted by y2karl at 10:53 AM on January 18, 2002
posted by y2karl at 10:53 AM on January 18, 2002
I buried Paul.
posted by kirkaracha at 11:10 AM on January 18, 2002
posted by kirkaracha at 11:10 AM on January 18, 2002
Stop drooling, Fes.*
*this mildly humourous rejoinder is not intended in any way to tacitly concede that the sexist designation 'chicks' is in any way appropriate or acceptable, nor is it intended as a slur against those who are unable to control or otherwise keep within the bounds of their mouths any overproduction of saliva due to medical or psychological reasons and are thus stigmatized by society. Sometimes a joke is just a joke. Please wag any accusatory fingers elsewhere. Thank you and goodnight.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:29 PM on January 18, 2002
*this mildly humourous rejoinder is not intended in any way to tacitly concede that the sexist designation 'chicks' is in any way appropriate or acceptable, nor is it intended as a slur against those who are unable to control or otherwise keep within the bounds of their mouths any overproduction of saliva due to medical or psychological reasons and are thus stigmatized by society. Sometimes a joke is just a joke. Please wag any accusatory fingers elsewhere. Thank you and goodnight.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:29 PM on January 18, 2002
« Older thisislondon crashes IE for me. you? | When did Salon start requiring a WELL account to... Newer »
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by mattpfeff at 10:03 PM on January 17, 2002