Is this the record for number of links in a FPP?

April 7, 2009 10:03 AM

Is this the record for number of links in a FPP? I count 106.
posted by Joe Beese to MetaFilter-Related at 10:03 AM (46 comments total)

I think it's definitely #1 for footnotes.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:05 AM on April 7, 2009

Are RSS feeds really quality stuff? Interesting approach to a FPP.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:11 AM on April 7, 2009

It isn't a slam dunk. For a while there was fad for huge posts containing a link for each letter in the post.
posted by Mitheral at 10:13 AM on April 7, 2009

this one has a lot, tooooo
posted by nitsuj at 10:18 AM on April 7, 2009

This one has to win, right?
posted by mesh gear fox at 10:21 AM on April 7, 2009 [3 favorites]

"You call that a lot of links? These have a lot of links."
posted by Pronoiac at 10:28 AM on April 7, 2009 [1 favorite]

I was going to post that then search for the one that mesh gear fox posted. Dead links ahoy there.
posted by Pronoiac at 10:34 AM on April 7, 2009

I thought my blaxploitation post was pretty epic but those ones definitely have me beat. I'm guessing I probably hold the title for highest average number of links per FPP though.
posted by burnmp3s at 10:42 AM on April 7, 2009

The Gospel According to YouTube

The Memory of Love's Refrain

Dark Was The Night (Cold Was The Ground)
posted by y2karl at 11:17 AM on April 7, 2009 [1 favorite]

The link nitsuj posted has 110 links, by my count.
posted by Night_owl at 11:40 AM on April 7, 2009

Ok, so do I favorite this thread or what? Either way I'm gonna need a bigger boat.

...and some vitamins.
posted by lysdexic at 12:25 PM on April 7, 2009

Blazecock Pileon: "Are RSS feeds really quality stuff? Interesting approach to a FPP."

Oh, don't be silly. The RSS feeds are not meant to stand on their own as separate "links", and are only included in this post because of the simple fact that the theme of the FPP is adding positive news sources to one's intake of daily news sources, for which RSS feeds are fairly essential.

'Tis inebriating to snark, snipe and snap and feel the rush of perceived self-wit flow through one's vein, Sir Snarkington ... that doesn't mean that the wit is necessarily Truth or anything more than petty posturing.
posted by WCityMike at 12:36 PM on April 7, 2009 [1 favorite]

'Tis inebriating to snark, snipe and snap and feel the rush of perceived self-wit flow through one's vein, Sir Snarkington ... that doesn't mean that the wit is necessarily Truth or anything more than petty posturing.

Man, where are pot and kettle when you need them.
posted by dersins at 12:41 PM on April 7, 2009

dersins: "'Tis inebriating to snark, snipe and snap and feel the rush of perceived self-wit flow through one's vein, Sir Snarkington ... that doesn't mean that the wit is necessarily Truth or anything more than petty posturing.

Man, where are pot and kettle when you need them."

[channelling Mel Blanc:]

Right here!

*whips out pot and kettle, places pot on dersins' head, goes KLANG KLANG KLANG KLANG KLANG KLANG KLANG banging kettle against pot*

WOO HOO! WOO HOO! WOO HOO! WOO HOO!

*Dersins removes pot with entire body still vibrating with little animated motion lines*
posted by WCityMike at 12:55 PM on April 7, 2009 [2 favorites]

Is WCityMike off his meds again?
posted by dersins at 12:58 PM on April 7, 2009

dersins: "Is WCityMike off his meds again?"

I've never found a better prescription for those that conduct themselves with such overwrought grave aplomb than to counter with a little animated chaos.
posted by WCityMike at 1:02 PM on April 7, 2009 [3 favorites]

Is WCityMike off his meds again?

I've lost count of the times he's been off his meds. 106, maybe?
posted by Elmore at 1:03 PM on April 7, 2009 [1 favorite]

ADHD reigns supreme!
posted by new and improved buzzman IV at 1:09 PM on April 7, 2009

'Tis inebriating to snark, snipe and snap and feel the rush of perceived self-wit flow through one's vein, Sir Snarkington ... that doesn't mean that the wit is necessarily Truth or anything more than petty posturing.

WCityMike this sort of thing would die down more quickly if you didn't decide to jump right in to the middle of it arms a-flailing. Your choice, certainly.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 1:17 PM on April 7, 2009

jessamyn: "WCityMike this sort of thing would die down more quickly if you didn't decide to jump right in to the middle of it arms a-flailing. Your choice, certainly."

My past contains far too much silently taking it on the chin for it to be a comfortable choice. I nonetheless continue to exercise that choice, but not always. And I wish you'd also direct your chastisement towards those who start "this sort of thing."
posted by WCityMike at 1:21 PM on April 7, 2009

those who start "this sort of thing."

You mean yourself? BP made a comment questioning whether RSS feeds were quality links. A legitimate question, though not one on which I have an opinion, since I'm frankly not really sure what to do with an RSS feed. You immediately responded with an incredibly snotty, condescending personal attack on him. How is this not you "starting" this?
posted by dersins at 1:30 PM on April 7, 2009

Flamewars down the hall, to the left. This the "oh look at my link dump" department.
posted by wheelieman at 1:40 PM on April 7, 2009

dersins: "You mean yourself?"

Bullshit, dersins. BP's remark wasn't the harmless query you're making it out to be. It was a snark-filled catty remark. I responded to that.
posted by WCityMike at 1:51 PM on April 7, 2009

I think that's my point. BP made a fairly innocuous comment which you took in the worst way possible and turned it into a thing. Maybe you guys have history that I don't know about, but from the perspective of this thread and this thread only, you started it. I'm aware that you don't think this is the case which is why I'm explaining it this way. From my perspective, that's how it looks.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 1:51 PM on April 7, 2009

*sings*
"I can feel a timeout coming on"
knows that only people living in Australia will understand, but doesn't care
posted by dg at 1:52 PM on April 7, 2009

Flamewars down the hall, to the left.

You know what I want to build when I get evil-genius rich? A machine for engaging in flamewars.

I'm picturing a cement room, maybe the size of a football field. On each end is a fortified bunker with a natural gas flame-thrower attachment, the hoses for fuel sunk deep into an armored/ cooled reserve just to keep it somewhat safe.

The two combatants would get dressed in protective fire-suits and each man a bunker, blasting away at one another with the throwers, only stopping when someone decides it's too hot and surrenders.

This could then be tied into a public address system, where the two challengers would argue back and forth, and the audience would decide if they had scored a point and could then allocate them additional fuel.

I'd have TV cameras record the whole thing in high def, and probably make a fortune selling the footage to a network.
posted by quin at 2:00 PM on April 7, 2009 [1 favorite]

Your point seems to be the same as dersins', Jessamyn. I don't understand how either of you could parse his statement as not being catty and snarky — especially given the second sentence.
posted by WCityMike at 2:03 PM on April 7, 2009

Another vote for "don't see where the flamebait is", WCityMike. I read his comment, then I read your comment and parsed it as a sort of half-in-joke half-snark, and it wasn't till I read jessamyn's admonishment that I actually went back, re-read the exchange, and saw the hostility. At great effort.

Maybe it's because I've been reading the rape thread and my snark-meter's a bit worn out right now, or something.
posted by Phire at 2:20 PM on April 7, 2009

From where I sit:

Not snarky, if somewhat loaded:
Are RSS feeds really quality stuff?

Snarky:
Are RSS feeds really quality stuff? Interesting approach to a FPP.

Sentence two could pass the test without the "really" qualifier in the first.

Again, no horse, just how I read it when I read it.
posted by SpiffyRob at 2:28 PM on April 7, 2009

I don't understand how either of you could parse his statement as not being catty and snarky — especially given the second sentence.

That's being really thin-skinned, WCityMike.
posted by crossoverman at 2:29 PM on April 7, 2009

You know what I want to build when I get evil-genius rich? A machine for engaging in flamewars.

A silver corridor perhaps?
posted by lysdexic at 2:30 PM on April 7, 2009

The irony of the good news post turning into this thread, it is not beyond me. Everyone should smile, or read something, just 106 clicks away.
posted by IvoShandor at 2:30 PM on April 7, 2009

Avoiding discussing of the flame-up here, I got to 106 links in my Presidential Campaign Ad post during the 1984 election chunk.

ERGO, I AM MORE OFF MY MEDS THAN ANY OTHER MOTHERFUCKER IN HERE.

Or something.

I love you guys.
posted by flibbertigibbet at 2:35 PM on April 7, 2009

Funny that the flamery is relative to a post about positive things, good news.
posted by ambient2 at 2:58 PM on April 7, 2009

Damn. I spent 15mins not finding a really old post by someone (I thought it was tamim, but no) who constructed their 100th post with 100 links on India/culture/hinduism. Pre-2004 for sure. I thought it was the same person who did all that creepoid detective work writing up a spiel about rcade was it? Maybe I've got it all wrong. I'll go now.
posted by peacay at 3:07 PM on April 7, 2009

"Silently taking it on the chin" and "'Tis inebriating to snark, snipe and snap and feel the rush of perceived self-wit..." are two poles between which hangs a great clothesline spectrum of options. I can understand if you don't want to be perched on the one pole, but that's not really a good reason to perch on the other one instead.

If you think someone's being unnecessarily rude, maybe just say "Hey, look, I think that's a little rude" or something like that. You can stand up for yourself without sounding like you want to engage in a pissing match; you come out of it looking better, and everybody else is spared having to walk around so much piss on the floor.
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:14 PM on April 7, 2009 [3 favorites]

"'Tis inebriating" is the entirely different pole from silently taking it on the chin? Seriously? It's like I've suddenly walked into MetaJaneAustenFilter.
posted by WCityMike at 3:20 PM on April 7, 2009

Look, you're pointing out that you read BP's comment as risibly snarky; people have variously agreed and disagreed (more the latter by my rough count), but it's a given that people can read this stuff fairly subjectively, right?

Similarly, your comment read to me as excruciatingly smug and condescending. I can accept that that's not how everybody reads it and that that's not what you were going for. So be it.

But if you read other people's comments only in the most unflattering light and your own only in the most flattering, you're going to rub a lot of people the wrong way with your interactions.

In general, I think it's pretty fair to say that a "you're stupider than you think you are" rebuke dressed up in pretentious clothing is a long haul from taking the high road. If you're going to bridle at other people's snark, consider not going so far out of your way to do the same thing back.
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:31 PM on April 7, 2009 [3 favorites]

peacay - Bollywood links.

rcade's profile -> popular favorites -> what you were searching for -> tamim's profile -> his posts, then some skimming

Oddly, tamim's not mentioned on the wiki.
posted by Pronoiac at 3:35 PM on April 7, 2009

"... and it took absolutely forever to find the parking spot. So. How was your day?"

"I read an online shouting match about links to RSS feeds."

"What are RSS feeds?"

"Look. I don't have time for your shit."
posted by shadytrees at 3:35 PM on April 7, 2009 [5 favorites]

It's hard to make any sort of response to what you wrote, cortex, because it's pretty much takes how subjectivity works in general and suggests that I'm applying my perceptions here to my continual interactions with Mefites in general.

I don't read other people's comments only in the most unflattering light and my own only in the most flattering in the generalized sense. I read it in this particular situation because, surprise, BP was being a fuckhead.

I read Blazecock Pileon's comment in a pretty understandable light — as being a condenscending prick of an asshole — and I read my own as being a admittedly hoity-toity faux-Old English version of "it might be fun to get drunk on the fun of being snarky to someone, but that shouldn't make you confused that you just said something truthful." Which is not "you're stupider than you think you are" -- it's a response to someone being a snarky asshole to you. Which, in this case, BP was.

Plus, I don't get your last sentence: "If you're going to bridle at other people's snark, consider not going so far out of your way to do the same thing back." It implies a contrarian viewpoint, something flipped, but how would that work? "other people bridling at your snark" ... do the same thing back ... ? Mind clarifying the sentence construction on that one?

God, you know, I take the time to craft what I perceive to be a really good FPP, something that might bring a few bright lights into this really fucked-up day and age of ours, and look at all the first comments that roll out of the gate, and then I get a snarky MeTa about the post, and then I get BP's snarky little MeTa comment.

Sometimes the Metafilter community is great. Sometimes you are all just a GIANT bunch of assholes.
posted by WCityMike at 3:58 PM on April 7, 2009

And, sigh, surprise, big fat fucking flameout. Sometimes I just do not get the 'Net culture of Mefi. There are the most amazing acts of kindness in so many places on the site ... but there seems to be this intense thriving encouraged subculture of "hey, let's see exactly how witty we can be with nasty comments!". And then when people get nasty right back at them ...
posted by WCityMike at 4:01 PM on April 7, 2009

Plus, I don't get your last sentence: "If you're going to bridle at other people's snark, consider not going so far out of your way to do the same thing back." It implies a contrarian viewpoint, something flipped, but how would that work? "other people bridling at your snark" ... do the same thing back ... ? Mind clarifying the sentence construction on that one?

I think he meant something along these lines: "If you are going to call people a "GIANT bunch of assholes" for doing X, it might behoove you not to do 2X."

Because what does that make you?
posted by dersins at 4:12 PM on April 7, 2009

dersins: "I think he meant something along these lines: "If you are going to call people a "GIANT bunch of assholes" for doing X, it might behoove you not to do 2X." Because what does that make you?"

Fuck you, dersins.
posted by WCityMike at 4:14 PM on April 7, 2009

You sure showed me.
posted by dersins at 4:18 PM on April 7, 2009 [4 favorites]

I'm sorry your post didn't get as positive a reception as you wanted, but I think you're focusing way too much on the negative here instead of just shrugging it off and being okay with the post you made and what positive commentary its generated.

As far as how this thread is going, I'm at a loss. If you just completely don't get that you are simultaneously complaining about how awful this being-a-jerk thing is and being a jerk at the same time, I don't know how to convey it to you, but if we're wandering into "fuck you" territory I'm just going to close this down.
posted by cortex (staff) at 4:23 PM on April 7, 2009 [1 favorite]