Thanks for using NSFW, but... June 9, 2009 1:55 PM Subscribe
Please put the NSFW stuff after the NSFW tag, behind the link.
Would you feel comfortable with your boss, subordinates or co-workers seeing the FPP part of this post on your screen? (yep, NSFW).
Anon, if you'd like to transform the FPP part of the question into something SFW, may I suggest contacting the mods and requesting something like this:
Help me make a better grilled cheese sandwich (NSFW) [more inside]
Previously.
Would you feel comfortable with your boss, subordinates or co-workers seeing the FPP part of this post on your screen? (yep, NSFW).
Anon, if you'd like to transform the FPP part of the question into something SFW, may I suggest contacting the mods and requesting something like this:
Help me make a better grilled cheese sandwich (NSFW) [more inside]
Previously.
Wait, so you're suggesting that a better solution is that everything above the [more inside] be some kind of vague innuendo? Really?
posted by roll truck roll at 2:00 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by roll truck roll at 2:00 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
The world doesn't revolve around your prudish workplace.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:00 PM on June 9, 2009 [15 favorites]
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:00 PM on June 9, 2009 [15 favorites]
Did you know your "previously" link goes to a whole bunch of jeering against the idea of having to keep the site clean?
posted by CunningLinguist at 2:02 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by CunningLinguist at 2:02 PM on June 9, 2009
Can we just encourage people to use the agreed-upon standard euphemisms in the front page part? Like asking for tips on how to make a really big grilled cheese sandwich that doesn't actually fit in your mouth?
posted by burnmp3s at 2:06 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by burnmp3s at 2:06 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
On non-preview I see that joke was already made in the actual post and in the tags. If there's a really obvious joke that can be made in MetaTalk, can people make sure to put it in the main part so that lazy people like me won't miss it and accidently make the same joke without previewing?
posted by burnmp3s at 2:09 PM on June 9, 2009 [4 favorites]
posted by burnmp3s at 2:09 PM on June 9, 2009 [4 favorites]
I like my grilled cheese sandwiches with tater tots.
posted by not_on_display at 2:10 PM on June 9, 2009 [5 favorites]
posted by not_on_display at 2:10 PM on June 9, 2009 [5 favorites]
may I suggest contacting the mods and requesting something like this:
Help me make a better grilled cheese sandwich (NSFW) [more inside]
"Hey, Boss, weren't you asking about how to make a grilled cheese sandwich? I just got this link on how to NEVER MIND, FORGET I SAID ANYTHING, REALLY, STAY OVER THERE.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:10 PM on June 9, 2009 [11 favorites]
Help me make a better grilled cheese sandwich (NSFW) [more inside]
"Hey, Boss, weren't you asking about how to make a grilled cheese sandwich? I just got this link on how to NEVER MIND, FORGET I SAID ANYTHING, REALLY, STAY OVER THERE.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:10 PM on June 9, 2009 [11 favorites]
I'm eagerly waiting for the glorious day when someone will pop in here asking advice on how to make REAL grilled cheese sandwiches.
posted by _dario at 2:16 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by _dario at 2:16 PM on June 9, 2009
I was a little twigged when I saw the AskMe question linked to above. I'd rather have the post titles and urls be safe for work. The content inside can be anything goes, as long as the post is tagged.
posted by zippy at 2:18 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by zippy at 2:18 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
Wait wait wait—you mean my grilled cheese party was actually a...
o_O
posted by ocherdraco at 2:22 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
o_O
posted by ocherdraco at 2:22 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
I like to think that somewhere there's a diet forum where it's forbidden to mention delicious foods, and on that forum, right now, someone is asking how to perform oral sex as a coded request for grilled cheese sandwich recipes.
posted by zippy at 2:23 PM on June 9, 2009 [20 favorites]
posted by zippy at 2:23 PM on June 9, 2009 [20 favorites]
Wait, so you're suggesting that a better solution is that everything above the [more inside] be some kind of vague innuendo? Really?
Yes, that is how most people do it. Really.
Otherwise, "NSFW" is a pointless warning. What does it even mean? "Just so you know, that explicitly sexual description you just read was not safe for work"?
posted by Jaltcoh at 2:28 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
Yes, that is how most people do it. Really.
Otherwise, "NSFW" is a pointless warning. What does it even mean? "Just so you know, that explicitly sexual description you just read was not safe for work"?
posted by Jaltcoh at 2:28 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
I, for one, occasionally use Metafilter (and Ask, particularly) for work. So, yes, it would be nice if content above the cut were SFW.
posted by elfgirl at 2:36 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by elfgirl at 2:36 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
Otherwise, "NSFW" is a pointless warning. What does it even mean?
NSFW means "this link goes to images/sounds that may be problematic at your workplace" at MetaFilter. This is what we say in the FAQ. Since we've made the post titles into the URLs of the questions/posts, we can't really police the wording that people put into them except to say "hey this sort of thing shows up in the URLS, be mindful." However, even if we went back to change the post title the URL is now fixed and would require mathowie/pb-like access to the database to change. So, it's not something we'll do. If you can't read URLs with bad words in them, surfing MeFi at work may not be a good idea for you.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 2:37 PM on June 9, 2009
NSFW means "this link goes to images/sounds that may be problematic at your workplace" at MetaFilter. This is what we say in the FAQ. Since we've made the post titles into the URLs of the questions/posts, we can't really police the wording that people put into them except to say "hey this sort of thing shows up in the URLS, be mindful." However, even if we went back to change the post title the URL is now fixed and would require mathowie/pb-like access to the database to change. So, it's not something we'll do. If you can't read URLs with bad words in them, surfing MeFi at work may not be a good idea for you.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 2:37 PM on June 9, 2009
This sounds like a job for a greasemonkey script that hides all NSFW posts, and another one that highlights the NSFW posts for when you get home.
posted by BrotherCaine at 2:41 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by BrotherCaine at 2:41 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
I've reduced the font on the title bar and taskbar to be almost unreadable without binoculars. Obviously this doesn't mitigate my browsing history at work, but at least it's not flagrantly obvious to passersby that I'm reading about blowjobs.
posted by desjardins at 2:43 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by desjardins at 2:43 PM on June 9, 2009
jessamyn: I'm not saying you or any of the mods should be doing something differently, e.g. actively changing the asker's text. And I'm not saying I "can't read URLs with bad words in them" (although the URL is hardly the only problem with that AskMe). There's a separate question of what the ideal approach is for individual Mefites. I was responding to someone who asked if a good approach would be for the asker to use subtle language on the front page, followed by "NSFW," and save the more explicit parts for under the fold. My answer: yes, this would be a good way to word one's questions if they're explicitly sexual. While I see your point that someone who really cannot read anything sexual just shouldn't read AskMe, that doesn't stop people from using some discretion in wording their question. And if they're not going to use discretion, then I maintain that it's pointless to add "NSFW" in reference to the text inside (which is what this person was talking about -- not "images/sound").
posted by Jaltcoh at 2:48 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by Jaltcoh at 2:48 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
Ocherdraco: Grilled cheese parties are like rainbow parties, except, you know, they actually exist.
posted by Juliet Banana at 2:50 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by Juliet Banana at 2:50 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
AskMeFi is about people getting help with their problems, not easing your on-the-clock cyberslacking. Anon is actually following the guidelines perfectly: "This will show up on the front page, so try to ask your entire question while keeping it to a paragraph (if you must go on longer, use the optional extended area)."
If Anon were to have hidden their question behind some cutesy innuendo as the title and main question, it would decrease the likelihood of someone with pertinent blowjob advice from noticing it and answering. You can't expect everyone to read every question on the grounds that the main question might be subterfuge and they might have relevant advice for the seekrit real question.
On preview...
> Wait, so you're suggesting that a better solution is that everything above the [more inside] be some kind of vague innuendo? Really?
Yes, that is how most people do it. Really.
Most people do something like "Awkward virgin question inside..." or "Embarrassing problem with girly-bits...". That's not silly counter-productive innuendo about grilled cheese sandwiches.
posted by CKmtl at 2:51 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
If Anon were to have hidden their question behind some cutesy innuendo as the title and main question, it would decrease the likelihood of someone with pertinent blowjob advice from noticing it and answering. You can't expect everyone to read every question on the grounds that the main question might be subterfuge and they might have relevant advice for the seekrit real question.
On preview...
> Wait, so you're suggesting that a better solution is that everything above the [more inside] be some kind of vague innuendo? Really?
Yes, that is how most people do it. Really.
Most people do something like "Awkward virgin question inside..." or "Embarrassing problem with girly-bits...". That's not silly counter-productive innuendo about grilled cheese sandwiches.
posted by CKmtl at 2:51 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
Did anyone ever figure out what the hell taters were? Really, I'm still lying awake at night over this.
posted by tristeza at 2:53 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by tristeza at 2:53 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
... it would be nice if content above the cut were SFW.
I suspected all along someone would bring up the issue of circumcision in this very thread!
posted by ericb at 2:53 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
I suspected all along someone would bring up the issue of circumcision in this very thread!
posted by ericb at 2:53 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
Did anyone ever figure out what the hell taters were?
Yeah.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:01 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
Yeah.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:01 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
You lie.
posted by CunningLinguist at 3:06 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by CunningLinguist at 3:06 PM on June 9, 2009
It shows in in firewall and proxy server logs, and also in browser histories.
Setup a linux VM at home, ssh in, and use lynx.
posted by nomisxid at 3:08 PM on June 9, 2009
Setup a linux VM at home, ssh in, and use lynx.
posted by nomisxid at 3:08 PM on June 9, 2009
This sounds like a job for a greasemonkey script that hides all NSFW posts, and another one that highlights the NSFW posts for when you get home
Alternatively: maybe pb could code something up so people could opt-into a kinder, safer version, kind of like the oft-requested "professional white background".
Instead of "lo-fi", it could be called "LA!-LA!-LA!-fi".
posted by Ufez Jones at 3:10 PM on June 9, 2009
Alternatively: maybe pb could code something up so people could opt-into a kinder, safer version, kind of like the oft-requested "professional white background".
Instead of "lo-fi", it could be called "LA!-LA!-LA!-fi".
posted by Ufez Jones at 3:10 PM on June 9, 2009
Ugh. This argument always devolves into "there is no such thing as NSFW, you prude".
posted by smackfu at 3:16 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by smackfu at 3:16 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
And I don't really understand what world anonymous lives in where they wrote that title and then tagged it as NSFW.
posted by smackfu at 3:18 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by smackfu at 3:18 PM on June 9, 2009
NSFW on MeFi is generally for sound and images and not text. It's a little difficult to go back and forth with an AnonyMe poster [since we don't know who they are] so I erred on the side of including this.
Understood. Anon didn't have anything except text behind the link, though, so clearly they were trying to indicate that the text would not be SFW. Which I appreciate. If s/he is going to use the tag for that purpose, though, it would just helpful if the tag came before the language. (On preview, what Jaltcoh said).
Did you know your "previously" link goes to a whole bunch of jeering against the idea of having to keep the site clean?
The question and some of the answers made me laugh, and it's on topic. I am okay with linking to posts where not everyone agrees with me.
posted by txvtchick at 3:22 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
Understood. Anon didn't have anything except text behind the link, though, so clearly they were trying to indicate that the text would not be SFW. Which I appreciate. If s/he is going to use the tag for that purpose, though, it would just helpful if the tag came before the language. (On preview, what Jaltcoh said).
Did you know your "previously" link goes to a whole bunch of jeering against the idea of having to keep the site clean?
The question and some of the answers made me laugh, and it's on topic. I am okay with linking to posts where not everyone agrees with me.
posted by txvtchick at 3:22 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
I suspected all along someone would bring up the issue of circumcision in this very thread!
Foreskins: Nature's vague innuendo
posted by elfgirl at 3:25 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
Foreskins: Nature's vague innuendo
posted by elfgirl at 3:25 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
And I don't really understand what world anonymous lives in where they wrote that title and then tagged it as NSFW.
Oh cum on. That title could have meant anything.
posted by gman at 3:25 PM on June 9, 2009
Oh cum on. That title could have meant anything.
posted by gman at 3:25 PM on June 9, 2009
There's nothing that winds me up - people asking why other people's AskMes are anonymous aside - quite like people complaining that they might get sacked because of something they are looking at on Metafilter while in the workplace.
Briefly, a site where a disparate group of people are free to post things that interest them is unlikely to be safe for work 100% of the time. If in any doubt YOU stay the fuck off it, rather than trying to coerce the other 39,999 of us into making your workplace browsing a risk-free and enjoyable experience.
posted by fire&wings at 3:27 PM on June 9, 2009 [5 favorites]
Briefly, a site where a disparate group of people are free to post things that interest them is unlikely to be safe for work 100% of the time. If in any doubt YOU stay the fuck off it, rather than trying to coerce the other 39,999 of us into making your workplace browsing a risk-free and enjoyable experience.
posted by fire&wings at 3:27 PM on June 9, 2009 [5 favorites]
I am okay with linking to posts where not everyone agrees with me.
I meant: this has come up before, and the suggestion was pretty emphatically howled down.
posted by CunningLinguist at 3:32 PM on June 9, 2009
I meant: this has come up before, and the suggestion was pretty emphatically howled down.
posted by CunningLinguist at 3:32 PM on June 9, 2009
The wording and structure of the post in question make me feel really conflicted. On one hand, I'd love to live in a world where sex is discussed as casually as OS preference or cocktail recipes, and where terminology and euphemism choice are just harmless matters of personal quirk. On the other hand, my immediate and lingering impression is that the question was presented very crudely, particularly considering the overall context of MetaFilter.
Thanks for the introspection, anon!
posted by chudmonkey at 3:39 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
Thanks for the introspection, anon!
posted by chudmonkey at 3:39 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
I am okay with linking to posts where not everyone agrees with me.
I meant: this has come up before, and the suggestion was pretty emphatically howled down.
My suggestion is for Anon, and anyone else who wants to use it. They can use this topic and the one I linked to as data points and agree or disagree as they see fit, regardless of whether a suggestion was "howled down" or not.
posted by txvtchick at 3:51 PM on June 9, 2009
"There's nothing that winds me up - people asking why other people's AskMes are anonymous aside - quite like people complaining that they might get sacked because of something they are looking at on Metafilter while in the workplace."
I don't think (I'm not sure) that that's what's happening here. It isn't so much "don't write stuff that can get me fired", or even "label the stuff that would get me fired so that I won't click it" as much as if you're going to label stuff that would get me fired, label it in some way that the label could help me avoid it.
On a hypothetical case, for example, I wouldn't complain if someone linked to two porn videos on the front page and didn't label them "NSFW". And I wouldn't even complain if they linked two porn videos but only labeled one of them "NSFW". But in the second case, I might send a MeMail to the author suggesting, next time, if they're going to help a brother out by using the NSFW label, use it on both links. Nicely, of course, because labelling something "NSFW" is a courtesy, not an expected action. This being an anonymous AskMe, though, the only way one can pass that word on to the author is via MeTa.
posted by Bugbread at 3:53 PM on June 9, 2009
I don't think (I'm not sure) that that's what's happening here. It isn't so much "don't write stuff that can get me fired", or even "label the stuff that would get me fired so that I won't click it" as much as if you're going to label stuff that would get me fired, label it in some way that the label could help me avoid it.
On a hypothetical case, for example, I wouldn't complain if someone linked to two porn videos on the front page and didn't label them "NSFW". And I wouldn't even complain if they linked two porn videos but only labeled one of them "NSFW". But in the second case, I might send a MeMail to the author suggesting, next time, if they're going to help a brother out by using the NSFW label, use it on both links. Nicely, of course, because labelling something "NSFW" is a courtesy, not an expected action. This being an anonymous AskMe, though, the only way one can pass that word on to the author is via MeTa.
posted by Bugbread at 3:53 PM on June 9, 2009
If sexy language is going to get you in trouble at work, generally speaking you shouldn't be browsing MeFi from work.Please. I'm begging you. Please listen to the librarian. You know, our overworked mod, the one with the degree in library sciences and with an acute eye for freedom of speech issues, the one that invented the brilliant "The FBI has NOT been here today" sign to warn patrons if anyone with a badge came and inspect book checkout history logs.
The last thing our mods need is to try to enforce the dizzying array of bullshit that passes for "safe for work" in one workplace and "not safe for work" elsewhere. It's not their job to protect your job, and it's not the users job to consider all the ways and means to self-censor to protect your job.
Collectively we have enough bullshit to worry about without having to second-guess ourselves every time we want or need to post a racy question or post. Collectively we have enough bullshit foisted on us by draconian workplaces and corporate entities while outside of our workplaces.
Fine, you want to talk about polite? Is it really polite to expect tens of thousands of users to self-censor to whatever unknown standards of your workplace simply so you can safely visit MetaFilter from work? Sorry, I don't think so. I think that the very idea of this is a waking nightmare of a feeble, anti-humanist bureaucratic mindset run amok. It's like a nightmare out of a Huxley novel or a certain Terry Gilliam movie in which the denizens must resort to guerrilla air conditioner repairmen.
No. Don't ask us to self censor for the sake of your job. It's not polite. Your workplace might not be open or balanced enough to appreciate the full scope of humanity from the sublime to the sordid - but MetaFilter is. Keep your damn linguistic shackles and expectations the fuck away from MetaFilter. This is your own client-side problem, not something that can or should be solved from the server-side.
This is bigger than you or your job, and bigger than MetaFilter. You can get another job. But we have only one MetaFilter. Break it and tame it with more dumb rules like this and it will never be the same.
posted by loquacious at 3:54 PM on June 9, 2009 [9 favorites]
Over invested much?
I'm quoting FREEDOM!
posted by loquacious at 4:02 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
I'm quoting FREEDOM!
posted by loquacious at 4:02 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
everything above the [more inside] be some kind of vague innuendo?
[more inside] - tee hee.
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:05 PM on June 9, 2009 [7 favorites]
[more inside] - tee hee.
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:05 PM on June 9, 2009 [7 favorites]
I suspected all along someone would bring up the issue of circumcision in this very thread!
Dear AskMe, my girlfriend is disgusted with the sort of ingredients I try and get her to include when she makes me a grilled cheese sandwich. She says I've got to get rid of the calamari before she'll make me a sandwich ever again.
posted by BrotherCaine at 4:10 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
Dear AskMe, my girlfriend is disgusted with the sort of ingredients I try and get her to include when she makes me a grilled cheese sandwich. She says I've got to get rid of the calamari before she'll make me a sandwich ever again.
posted by BrotherCaine at 4:10 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
"Over invested much?"
Nah, he's just loquacious.
posted by Bugbread at 4:15 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
Nah, he's just loquacious.
posted by Bugbread at 4:15 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
"Instead of demanding MetaFilter be made safe so you can peruse it at your job, perhaps you should stop reading MetaFilter at your job or find a different job. Sheesh."
I'm guessing one is just as likely to convince the entire net to write "NSFW" to save your job as one is to convince someone to quit their job or stop work-surfing because their requests for "NSFW" comments bother you.
So, yeah, both request and counter-request are as useful as an online petition.
posted by Bugbread at 4:18 PM on June 9, 2009
I'm guessing one is just as likely to convince the entire net to write "NSFW" to save your job as one is to convince someone to quit their job or stop work-surfing because their requests for "NSFW" comments bother you.
So, yeah, both request and counter-request are as useful as an online petition.
posted by Bugbread at 4:18 PM on June 9, 2009
It isn't so much "don't write stuff that can get me fired", or even "label the stuff that would get me fired so that I won't click it" as much as if you're going to label stuff that would get me fired, label it in some way that the label could help me avoid it.
More like "If you're going to label stuff that would get me fired, label it in some way that the label could help me avoid it, preferably by using a random euphemism with no obvious meaning and linking it a post that links to an article that sheds no further light on the meaning of this euphemism until over 100 comments later."
Not only would the obfuscation not help Anon, but I'd be willing to bet that it would cause people to ignore the NSFW warning:
"Grilled cheese? What's NSFW about grilled cheese? Fuck, this is going to bug me all day... it's just like that taters nonsense. Just one little clic—"
*blaring alarms*
"JOHNSON! What smut are you reading?!"
posted by CKmtl at 4:18 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
More like "If you're going to label stuff that would get me fired, label it in some way that the label could help me avoid it, preferably by using a random euphemism with no obvious meaning and linking it a post that links to an article that sheds no further light on the meaning of this euphemism until over 100 comments later."
Not only would the obfuscation not help Anon, but I'd be willing to bet that it would cause people to ignore the NSFW warning:
"Grilled cheese? What's NSFW about grilled cheese? Fuck, this is going to bug me all day... it's just like that taters nonsense. Just one little clic—"
*blaring alarms*
"JOHNSON! What smut are you reading?!"
posted by CKmtl at 4:18 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
Seriously, what is wrong with "cocks blowjob, NSFW more inside"? If your boss makes a big deal, you explain that AskMe is an often helpful website, show her/him the AskMe you asked about work stuff, and say, "sometimes there's more salacious stuff here, which I avoid reading."
If people can avoid getting fired for receiving "vi@gr@" emails, they can avoid getting fired for "cocks blowjob LOL" showing up on otherwise SFW AskMe. Just don't click through.
posted by explosion at 4:19 PM on June 9, 2009
If people can avoid getting fired for receiving "vi@gr@" emails, they can avoid getting fired for "cocks blowjob LOL" showing up on otherwise SFW AskMe. Just don't click through.
posted by explosion at 4:19 PM on June 9, 2009
MetaTalk seems to be working really hard at missing the point tonight. txvtchick isn't demanding anything. txvtchick has very nicely, without any real hyperbole, suggested that Anon - who already used a NSFW tag - is doing it wrong. That it's pointless to add a NSFW tag if you're already including NSFW material outside of the fold prior to the tag. What part of that suggestion is repressing us? It's a suggested guideline, like all the others we talk about around these parts. It's not like txvtchick asked the mods to build a V-chip and tell our moms on us. Jeesh!
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:28 PM on June 9, 2009 [17 favorites]
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:28 PM on June 9, 2009 [17 favorites]
txvtchick actually asked the anon poster to edit the question to be about grilled cheese sandwiches. The implication was that all text on the front page should be cleaned up.
posted by CunningLinguist at 4:33 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by CunningLinguist at 4:33 PM on June 9, 2009
I thought the poster was being facetious with the grilled cheese example. If that was serious, then, yeah, this is all kinds of dumb. "Need sexual advice for boyfriend issue (NSFW)" seems far more logical, and was what I thought txvtchick was really getting at.
"If people can avoid getting fired for receiving "vi@gr@" emails, they can avoid getting fired for "cocks blowjob LOL" showing up on otherwise SFW AskMe. Just don't click through."
Yeah, that sounds like the easiest course of action to me. Just tell your boss it was a spammer (even though it wasn't), and show a few questions related to your field, to show what AskMe really is all about. I know quite a few workplaces that are explicitly cool with Wikipedia, and while you could get in trouble for browsing the salacious entries, you wouldn't get in trouble if a vandal changed the page on Heterochromatin Protein 1 to say "cocks cocks lol cocks!!!"
posted by Bugbread at 4:34 PM on June 9, 2009
"If people can avoid getting fired for receiving "vi@gr@" emails, they can avoid getting fired for "cocks blowjob LOL" showing up on otherwise SFW AskMe. Just don't click through."
Yeah, that sounds like the easiest course of action to me. Just tell your boss it was a spammer (even though it wasn't), and show a few questions related to your field, to show what AskMe really is all about. I know quite a few workplaces that are explicitly cool with Wikipedia, and while you could get in trouble for browsing the salacious entries, you wouldn't get in trouble if a vandal changed the page on Heterochromatin Protein 1 to say "cocks cocks lol cocks!!!"
posted by Bugbread at 4:34 PM on June 9, 2009
This again?
posted by klangklangston at 4:34 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by klangklangston at 4:34 PM on June 9, 2009
You know where they censor the titles of the questions?
Yahoo Answers.
posted by TheOnlyCoolTim at 4:35 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
Yahoo Answers.
posted by TheOnlyCoolTim at 4:35 PM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
The rye bread barely fits in my microwave oven; how can I leaven better?
I really didn't want to ask this and I apologize if it's been risen before, but I searched the archives and the rest of the internet and have mostly been bogged down by general recipe books and Cuisine issues. So here's the deal: I enjoy microwaving unleaven bread, and I enjoy dipping them in sauce even more. But I have never made my current rye breads leaven from microwaving. Maybe I'm just awful at it, but I never thought I was bad at microwaving before this; I was always able to make bread leaven pretty quickly and they told me I was good at it. I realize every bread is different, but I cannot figure out what to do with my ingredients that will make him cum like eighty of the most virile bulls being pleasured at dawn by virgin milkmaid slaves during a local production of Semen Angel Falls.
posted by shadytrees at 4:38 PM on June 9, 2009 [9 favorites]
I really didn't want to ask this and I apologize if it's been risen before, but I searched the archives and the rest of the internet and have mostly been bogged down by general recipe books and Cuisine issues. So here's the deal: I enjoy microwaving unleaven bread, and I enjoy dipping them in sauce even more. But I have never made my current rye breads leaven from microwaving. Maybe I'm just awful at it, but I never thought I was bad at microwaving before this; I was always able to make bread leaven pretty quickly and they told me I was good at it. I realize every bread is different, but I cannot figure out what to do with my ingredients that will make him cum like eighty of the most virile bulls being pleasured at dawn by virgin milkmaid slaves during a local production of Semen Angel Falls.
posted by shadytrees at 4:38 PM on June 9, 2009 [9 favorites]
"txvtchick isn't demanding anything. txvtchick has very nicely, without any real hyperbole, suggested that Anon - who already used a NSFW tag - is doing it wrong."
Right. It isn't really imposing to ask Anon to hide NSFW stuff when Anon has already and voluntarily decided to label something as NSFW. Asking someone who hasn't labeled something as NSFW to do so is an imposition. Giving someone who has decided to use the NSFW tag advice on how to do so is far from Big Brother.
Although the grilled cheese sandwich, if a serious example, is pretty damn dumb. It doesn't make me angry, though. It's just dumb advice. If there's one thing AskMe is goddamn full of, it's bad advice, and we don't throw down thunderstorms every time that happens (except for medical and legal advice).
posted by Bugbread at 4:39 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
Right. It isn't really imposing to ask Anon to hide NSFW stuff when Anon has already and voluntarily decided to label something as NSFW. Asking someone who hasn't labeled something as NSFW to do so is an imposition. Giving someone who has decided to use the NSFW tag advice on how to do so is far from Big Brother.
Although the grilled cheese sandwich, if a serious example, is pretty damn dumb. It doesn't make me angry, though. It's just dumb advice. If there's one thing AskMe is goddamn full of, it's bad advice, and we don't throw down thunderstorms every time that happens (except for medical and legal advice).
posted by Bugbread at 4:39 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
Speaking of Yahoo (SO well named) Answers, I must share this, which I found the other day trying to figure up what was up with a bird singing at night outside my city window. The answer is actually great, but jesus god the questioner.
Everytime I stumble on stuff like this, I'm thankful anew for AskMe, filthy or not.
posted by CunningLinguist at 4:40 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
Everytime I stumble on stuff like this, I'm thankful anew for AskMe, filthy or not.
posted by CunningLinguist at 4:40 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
"You know where they censor the titles of the questions?
Yahoo Answers."
By "Yahoo Answers", do you mean "Yahoo Answers", or do you mean the "Bukkake Granny Advice Forum"?
posted by Bugbread at 4:41 PM on June 9, 2009
Yahoo Answers."
By "Yahoo Answers", do you mean "Yahoo Answers", or do you mean the "Bukkake Granny Advice Forum"?
posted by Bugbread at 4:41 PM on June 9, 2009
Seriously, what is wrong with "cocks blowjob, NSFW more inside"?
This is kind of a solid example of why we don't really want to bother going there from a policy perspective. What is wrong with that, really?
What's wrong with it is that for some people, the line of objectionableness falls another notch over: "cocks, blowjobs" is still NSFW as far as they're concerned. Maybe "oral sex question" would be okay. Maybe for some, it'd need to be more like "oral question".
Generally speaking, folks can write what they like in whatever language they like on the site; AskMe is not intended to be clean, and while I can totally appreciate the touchiness that can introduce to work-time browsing (I was part-timing at Mefi from a corporate network for a while, examining in my modly capacity the shit that was being flagged or otherwise called out as NSFW, so, whee, ride the tiger! and all that), a general attempt to Keep It Clean is kind of a non-starter.
So we draw a pretty permissive line and hope people will elect to show some kind of consideration or restraint when it's relevant, but that's about as far as it goes.
On the narrow question of whether it makes sense to write NSFW to warn against presumed not-safe-for-work plaintext on the same line as the warning itself: yes, in a vacuum that's pretty silly. It's also not something we see much of, so calling it out is probably not going to do much.
Aside from which, apparent silliness of it as stated above aside, I'd guess anonymous' motivation was something like "hey, I'm going to discuss blowjobs and dicks and orgasm at length below the fold, so heads up!", which is a pretty reasonable and thoughtful gesture on their part.
posted by cortex (staff) at 4:45 PM on June 9, 2009
This is kind of a solid example of why we don't really want to bother going there from a policy perspective. What is wrong with that, really?
What's wrong with it is that for some people, the line of objectionableness falls another notch over: "cocks, blowjobs" is still NSFW as far as they're concerned. Maybe "oral sex question" would be okay. Maybe for some, it'd need to be more like "oral question".
Generally speaking, folks can write what they like in whatever language they like on the site; AskMe is not intended to be clean, and while I can totally appreciate the touchiness that can introduce to work-time browsing (I was part-timing at Mefi from a corporate network for a while, examining in my modly capacity the shit that was being flagged or otherwise called out as NSFW, so, whee, ride the tiger! and all that), a general attempt to Keep It Clean is kind of a non-starter.
So we draw a pretty permissive line and hope people will elect to show some kind of consideration or restraint when it's relevant, but that's about as far as it goes.
On the narrow question of whether it makes sense to write NSFW to warn against presumed not-safe-for-work plaintext on the same line as the warning itself: yes, in a vacuum that's pretty silly. It's also not something we see much of, so calling it out is probably not going to do much.
Aside from which, apparent silliness of it as stated above aside, I'd guess anonymous' motivation was something like "hey, I'm going to discuss blowjobs and dicks and orgasm at length below the fold, so heads up!", which is a pretty reasonable and thoughtful gesture on their part.
posted by cortex (staff) at 4:45 PM on June 9, 2009
The implication was that all text on the front page should be cleaned up.
That wasn't the implication at all. txvtchick suggested that if Anon was trying to give a warning about NSFW content, that there were better ways to do it.
txvtchick explained this very clearly:
Anon didn't have anything except text behind the link, though, so clearly they were trying to indicate that the text would not be SFW. Which I appreciate. If s/he is going to use the tag for that purpose, though, it would just helpful if the tag came before the language. (On preview, what Jaltcoh said).
And followed that up with a very reasonable approach to counter arguments:
The question and some of the answers made me laugh, and it's on topic. I am okay with linking to posts where not everyone agrees with me.
So, in closing: I actually find txvtchick's comments here to be among the most open-minded in the thread.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:47 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
That wasn't the implication at all. txvtchick suggested that if Anon was trying to give a warning about NSFW content, that there were better ways to do it.
txvtchick explained this very clearly:
Anon didn't have anything except text behind the link, though, so clearly they were trying to indicate that the text would not be SFW. Which I appreciate. If s/he is going to use the tag for that purpose, though, it would just helpful if the tag came before the language. (On preview, what Jaltcoh said).
And followed that up with a very reasonable approach to counter arguments:
The question and some of the answers made me laugh, and it's on topic. I am okay with linking to posts where not everyone agrees with me.
So, in closing: I actually find txvtchick's comments here to be among the most open-minded in the thread.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:47 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
I'm torn.
On one hand, the FAQ is clear about the NSFW. And the nerd in me says, "Performs as specified."
On the other hand, I am with It's Raining Florence Henderson. Txvtchick seems reasonable and open-minded. And the logic is sound:
1) If you accept the premise that the NSFW note is needed for that AskMe at all, you're condoning it for the use of text, since, last I looked, there were no graphic images/sounds/video in that question. Apologies if that has changed.
2) If you condone the NSFW note for the use of text, rather than images/sounds/video, then putting the "NSFW" as it was is a bit late in the sentence.
On the gripping hand, we have a grilled cheese sandwich. Which, despite being a euphemism and hypothetical, reminds me that I have been at work for over eleven hours and would like to have dinner.
posted by adipocere at 4:50 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
On one hand, the FAQ is clear about the NSFW. And the nerd in me says, "Performs as specified."
On the other hand, I am with It's Raining Florence Henderson. Txvtchick seems reasonable and open-minded. And the logic is sound:
1) If you accept the premise that the NSFW note is needed for that AskMe at all, you're condoning it for the use of text, since, last I looked, there were no graphic images/sounds/video in that question. Apologies if that has changed.
2) If you condone the NSFW note for the use of text, rather than images/sounds/video, then putting the "NSFW" as it was is a bit late in the sentence.
On the gripping hand, we have a grilled cheese sandwich. Which, despite being a euphemism and hypothetical, reminds me that I have been at work for over eleven hours and would like to have dinner.
posted by adipocere at 4:50 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
Good point. Dinner. Mmm-hmm. I'm outta here!
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:54 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:54 PM on June 9, 2009
I'm not really sure where to comment about this but it seems ask.mefi has gotten rather strange over the past week or so. I can't quite put my finger on it yet, though.
posted by crapmatic at 4:55 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by crapmatic at 4:55 PM on June 9, 2009
A short list of some of the many things at my job that are NSFW: The internet. Computers in general. Scissors. Knives. Hot stoves. Pans. Griddles. Electrical sockets. Climbing on the back of the couch. The words "Nap time." Putting that in your mouth.
posted by grapefruitmoon at 4:56 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by grapefruitmoon at 4:56 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
Just to fuck with people, I think I'm going to put the words "oral cock" into every message. That way almost every thread on MeFi will be NSFW and we can be done with this stupidity.
posted by five fresh fish at 5:03 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by five fresh fish at 5:03 PM on June 9, 2009
I'm going to discuss blowjobs and dicks and orgasm at length below the fold, so heads up!"
Hehe*.
* -- said in Bart's crackly voice.
posted by ericb at 5:03 PM on June 9, 2009
Hehe*.
* -- said in Bart's crackly voice.
posted by ericb at 5:03 PM on June 9, 2009
Strange fact: "Oral cock" is not safe for work, but the synonymous "Oral Roberts" is. Bizarre.
posted by Bugbread at 5:21 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by Bugbread at 5:21 PM on June 9, 2009
Ooh, I know! Maybe we could just put, "hardcore taters inside!" instead of NSFW.
posted by misha at 5:24 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by misha at 5:24 PM on June 9, 2009
i'm with cortex - i took the nsfw to mean "oh boy am i going to go into more detail!". i can see the question being borderline safe for work, but then the indepthness of girth and length and technique would be a little less safe for work.
i mean - if she had said "how can i give better head (nsfw)", then that's hardly nsfw. if she had replaced cock with penis it would have also changed how nsfw the above the fold part was. when you get down into one word changed here or there, then you're really grasping at reasons to be offended.
it seems to me that the dom/sub questions of today would also tick the same 'i wouldn't want my boss to see this' filter (except my "boss" is actually my boyfriend, as i'm a homemaker - so i probably would show him all these threads). are you suggesting those get changed as well? if this site accepts questions about sexuality (and i'm glad it does), then you have to be comfortable perusing a site that accepts questions about sexuality and all the language that comes with it. if you or your company is not comfortable with that, hang out somewhere else during work.
posted by nadawi at 5:30 PM on June 9, 2009
i mean - if she had said "how can i give better head (nsfw)", then that's hardly nsfw. if she had replaced cock with penis it would have also changed how nsfw the above the fold part was. when you get down into one word changed here or there, then you're really grasping at reasons to be offended.
it seems to me that the dom/sub questions of today would also tick the same 'i wouldn't want my boss to see this' filter (except my "boss" is actually my boyfriend, as i'm a homemaker - so i probably would show him all these threads). are you suggesting those get changed as well? if this site accepts questions about sexuality (and i'm glad it does), then you have to be comfortable perusing a site that accepts questions about sexuality and all the language that comes with it. if you or your company is not comfortable with that, hang out somewhere else during work.
posted by nadawi at 5:30 PM on June 9, 2009
If sexy language is going to get you in trouble at work, generally speaking you shouldn't be browsing MeFi from work.
There's sexy language here? Where? WHERE?!
Oh, here it is. *phew*
posted by zerokey at 5:31 PM on June 9, 2009
There's sexy language here? Where? WHERE?!
Oh, here it is. *phew*
posted by zerokey at 5:31 PM on June 9, 2009
Setup a linux VM at home, ssh in, and use lynx.
But then the image tag wouldn't work.
And you know what really pisses me off? When I click a NSFW tag, and have to wonder, "What the hell kind of place do that person work at?" I mean, if you're going to use the NSFW tag, mean it!
posted by cjorgensen at 5:54 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
But then the image tag wouldn't work.
And you know what really pisses me off? When I click a NSFW tag, and have to wonder, "What the hell kind of place do that person work at?" I mean, if you're going to use the NSFW tag, mean it!
posted by cjorgensen at 5:54 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
To me, MC means make it clean.
posted by klangklangston at 6:19 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by klangklangston at 6:19 PM on June 9, 2009
Where the NSFW is placed in the above-the-fold text is completely irrelevant. If it's the first word, the third, the last, or every other word in the question, that is not going to make the naughty words magically invisible to one's nosy prissy boss. So unless you actually do want people to self-censor front page language according to somebody or other's standards of SFWness, then the only real way to fix this would be for the writer to skip the NSFW entirely since, courtesy notwithstanding, it's totally unnecessary. I mean, who could possibly read the initial question and think the rest was going to be something you'd recite aloud at a Baptist Sunday School picnic?
posted by FelliniBlank at 6:27 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by FelliniBlank at 6:27 PM on June 9, 2009
That question's title is totally safe for work if you work at the local glory hole.
posted by porn in the woods at 6:35 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by porn in the woods at 6:35 PM on June 9, 2009
Would you feel comfortable with your boss, subordinates or co-workers seeing the FPP part of this post on your screen?
A) Yes, I would if there were some valid reason for a coworker to be looking at AskMe on my computer.
B) I wouldn't feel comfortable with my coworkers seeing the Treaty of Fucking Westphalia on my screen if I hadn't expressly asked them to and they were rudely gaping or stealing glances uninvited. People who stroll past/into your workspace and surveil you or pick up shit off your desk or read your photocopies over your shoulder as you make them are as obnoxious as acquaintances you bump into at the grocery store who inspect and make comments about what you have in your cart.
posted by FelliniBlank at 6:38 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
A) Yes, I would if there were some valid reason for a coworker to be looking at AskMe on my computer.
B) I wouldn't feel comfortable with my coworkers seeing the Treaty of Fucking Westphalia on my screen if I hadn't expressly asked them to and they were rudely gaping or stealing glances uninvited. People who stroll past/into your workspace and surveil you or pick up shit off your desk or read your photocopies over your shoulder as you make them are as obnoxious as acquaintances you bump into at the grocery store who inspect and make comments about what you have in your cart.
posted by FelliniBlank at 6:38 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
Anon didn't have anything except text behind the link, though, so clearly they were trying to indicate that the text would not be SFW. Which I appreciate. If s/he is going to use the tag for that purpose, though, it would just helpful if the tag came before the language.
Sorry, I doggedly misunderstood this at first. Agreed, that what you're seeing is weird. Alas, it's not fixable in a way that would make the URL not say cum.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:50 PM on June 9, 2009
Sorry, I doggedly misunderstood this at first. Agreed, that what you're seeing is weird. Alas, it's not fixable in a way that would make the URL not say cum.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:50 PM on June 9, 2009
Although the grilled cheese sandwich, if a serious example, is pretty damn dumb.
No, it was intended to be amusing and (hopefully) take the sting out of the callout to the OP.
it seems to me that the dom/sub questions of today would also tick the same 'i wouldn't want my boss to see this' filter...are you suggesting those get changed as well?
No.
if this site accepts questions about sexuality (and i'm glad it does), then you have to be comfortable perusing a site that accepts questions about sexuality and all the language that comes with it. if you or your company is not comfortable with that, hang out somewhere else during work.
One of the many things that I like about MetaFilter is that the community generally does use the NSFW tag for stuff that is NSFW. It's pretty rare to come across an above the fold FPP that, for me at least, makes me go, Whoa, TMI. Since the tag exists, and is a well-used convention around here, and the OP used it, I don't think it's unreasonable for me to post a polite request to use it correctly.
MetaTalk influences how people post here, so why shouldn't my viewpoint be part of that? That's not the same thing as saying "Mods, clean everything up!" or "How dare you write a post that is not PG-13!" or even "The policy should be changed". In fact, I don't think I've ever even flagged a post.
Locquacious, thank you for your impassioned work/life/freedom/etiquette/internet surfing advice. I love you, bud. Nobody else can make blinkies the way you can.
posted by txvtchick at 7:08 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
No, it was intended to be amusing and (hopefully) take the sting out of the callout to the OP.
it seems to me that the dom/sub questions of today would also tick the same 'i wouldn't want my boss to see this' filter...are you suggesting those get changed as well?
No.
if this site accepts questions about sexuality (and i'm glad it does), then you have to be comfortable perusing a site that accepts questions about sexuality and all the language that comes with it. if you or your company is not comfortable with that, hang out somewhere else during work.
One of the many things that I like about MetaFilter is that the community generally does use the NSFW tag for stuff that is NSFW. It's pretty rare to come across an above the fold FPP that, for me at least, makes me go, Whoa, TMI. Since the tag exists, and is a well-used convention around here, and the OP used it, I don't think it's unreasonable for me to post a polite request to use it correctly.
MetaTalk influences how people post here, so why shouldn't my viewpoint be part of that? That's not the same thing as saying "Mods, clean everything up!" or "How dare you write a post that is not PG-13!" or even "The policy should be changed". In fact, I don't think I've ever even flagged a post.
Locquacious, thank you for your impassioned work/life/freedom/etiquette/internet surfing advice. I love you, bud. Nobody else can make blinkies the way you can.
posted by txvtchick at 7:08 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
it seems to me that the dom/sub questions of today would also tick the same 'i wouldn't want my boss to see this' filter...are you suggesting those get changed as well?
No.
but why not? is it because to your subjective sensibilities one is nsfw while the others aren't? that's my whole point - you decided that the words before the nsfw were in fact nsfw. other people have other opinions on that. to some the dom/sub questions would be way over the line of appropriate things to read at work. there isn't a good way to decide what is or is not nsfw.
I don't think it's unreasonable for me to post a polite request to use it correctly.
and a lot of us don't think it's unreasonable to decline your request which, as you admit, is an issue of personal attitudes, not a well agreed upon set of facts.
also - you called out but you didn't flag? you're doing it wrong.
posted by nadawi at 7:18 PM on June 9, 2009
No.
but why not? is it because to your subjective sensibilities one is nsfw while the others aren't? that's my whole point - you decided that the words before the nsfw were in fact nsfw. other people have other opinions on that. to some the dom/sub questions would be way over the line of appropriate things to read at work. there isn't a good way to decide what is or is not nsfw.
I don't think it's unreasonable for me to post a polite request to use it correctly.
and a lot of us don't think it's unreasonable to decline your request which, as you admit, is an issue of personal attitudes, not a well agreed upon set of facts.
also - you called out but you didn't flag? you're doing it wrong.
posted by nadawi at 7:18 PM on June 9, 2009
No, it was intended to be amusing and (hopefully) take the sting out of the callout to the OP.
Facetiousness disguised as earnestness isn't a great idea in a call-out.
posted by CKmtl at 7:32 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
Facetiousness disguised as earnestness isn't a great idea in a call-out.
posted by CKmtl at 7:32 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
"it seems to me that the dom/sub questions of today would also tick the same 'i wouldn't want my boss to see this' filter...are you suggesting those get changed as well?"
"No."
"but why not? is it because to your subjective sensibilities one is nsfw while the others aren't?"
I'm going to take a stab at this, and say "No, it's not because of subjective sensibilities, it's because this one is labeled NSFW, and that one isn't".
This whole MeTa is about "IF you're going to tag your post as 'NSFW', make sure the NSFW part isn't on the same page as the 'NSFW' label, because then it's pointless". In other words, it's about using "NSFW" incorrectly when one uses it. The dom/sub one didn't use "NSFW" at all, so why would txvtchick argue that the title be changed?
Rephrased: If person 1 says to person 2 "When you drive this car, make sure the seatbelt goes over the shoulder. not under it", why would you expect them to say the same thing to person 3, who is driving a motorcycle? There is no seatbelt to be used correctly or incorrectly. That has nothing to do with "subjective sensibilities". You can't tell a person who doesn't even have a seatbelt that they're wearing their seatbelt wrong, and you can't tell a person who isn't even using "NSFW" that they're using it wrong.
posted by Bugbread at 8:13 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
"No."
"but why not? is it because to your subjective sensibilities one is nsfw while the others aren't?"
I'm going to take a stab at this, and say "No, it's not because of subjective sensibilities, it's because this one is labeled NSFW, and that one isn't".
This whole MeTa is about "IF you're going to tag your post as 'NSFW', make sure the NSFW part isn't on the same page as the 'NSFW' label, because then it's pointless". In other words, it's about using "NSFW" incorrectly when one uses it. The dom/sub one didn't use "NSFW" at all, so why would txvtchick argue that the title be changed?
Rephrased: If person 1 says to person 2 "When you drive this car, make sure the seatbelt goes over the shoulder. not under it", why would you expect them to say the same thing to person 3, who is driving a motorcycle? There is no seatbelt to be used correctly or incorrectly. That has nothing to do with "subjective sensibilities". You can't tell a person who doesn't even have a seatbelt that they're wearing their seatbelt wrong, and you can't tell a person who isn't even using "NSFW" that they're using it wrong.
posted by Bugbread at 8:13 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
"a lot of us don't think it's unreasonable to decline your request which, as you admit, is an issue of personal attitudes, not a well agreed upon set of facts."
A lot of you aren't even addressing the issue of using it correctly, you're just talking about whether it should be used at all.
posted by Bugbread at 8:17 PM on June 9, 2009
A lot of you aren't even addressing the issue of using it correctly, you're just talking about whether it should be used at all.
posted by Bugbread at 8:17 PM on June 9, 2009
This whole MeTa is about "IF you're going to tag your post as 'NSFW', make sure the NSFW part isn't on the same page as the 'NSFW' label, because then it's pointless"
Is this such a pernicious problem that we needed a MeTa thread about it?
Answer: No. No, it is not.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:49 PM on June 9, 2009
Is this such a pernicious problem that we needed a MeTa thread about it?
Answer: No. No, it is not.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:49 PM on June 9, 2009
I really wish Anon hadn't used the NSFW tag at all.
posted by mediareport at 9:24 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by mediareport at 9:24 PM on June 9, 2009
(By which I mean I totally support people using the NSFW tag for images and video, but it was superfluous in this case).
posted by mediareport at 9:28 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by mediareport at 9:28 PM on June 9, 2009
Well, on the plus side, thanks for pointing out that question. Now I can forward it to all my lady-friends.
posted by graventy at 9:56 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by graventy at 9:56 PM on June 9, 2009
Also, uhm, sorry for the bombasticness and ineloquence at basically angrily restating what jessamyn and cortex explained much more kindly and succinctly than I did - but I'm trying to describe how high (or low, depending) I feel that the bar should be set.
To be fair I'm not responding just to txvtchick's request, but to the line of self-censorship as last battled out. We've been here before.
I'm really just trying to argue for descriptiveness and freedom and less friction or restrictions when it comes to posts and questions. People have enough hangups as it is.
posted by loquacious at 11:57 PM on June 9, 2009
To be fair I'm not responding just to txvtchick's request, but to the line of self-censorship as last battled out. We've been here before.
I'm really just trying to argue for descriptiveness and freedom and less friction or restrictions when it comes to posts and questions. People have enough hangups as it is.
posted by loquacious at 11:57 PM on June 9, 2009
You know, work prudishness aside: would it be so bad if people just used the cocktail party conversation rule for their lead-in paragraph? That is, if you were saying your lead-in to someone at a cocktail party, and a sudden silence in the room allowed everyone around you to hear it, would you be embarrassed? If so, put it inside. Seems the polite thing to do.
posted by davejay at 12:57 AM on June 10, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by davejay at 12:57 AM on June 10, 2009 [2 favorites]
Regarding that askme post - what's up with that shit? Straight up pornographic descriptions on the front page of the green? Seriously?
Let's just forget about the NSFW notation altogether then, if the fucking front page of the green is allowed to be NSFW.
And you guys with your non-prudish workplaces, and and your co-workers and bosses that have no problem seeing a question on your computer screen about fitting giant cocks into tiny mouths, congratulations on your jobs at Hustler or American Apparel or whatever place has absolutely no problems with descriptions of overt sexual acts including descriptions of genitalia, orifices, and fitting such genitalia into such orifices showing up in your workspace.
posted by jabberjaw at 1:31 AM on June 10, 2009 [1 favorite]
Let's just forget about the NSFW notation altogether then, if the fucking front page of the green is allowed to be NSFW.
And you guys with your non-prudish workplaces, and and your co-workers and bosses that have no problem seeing a question on your computer screen about fitting giant cocks into tiny mouths, congratulations on your jobs at Hustler or American Apparel or whatever place has absolutely no problems with descriptions of overt sexual acts including descriptions of genitalia, orifices, and fitting such genitalia into such orifices showing up in your workspace.
posted by jabberjaw at 1:31 AM on June 10, 2009 [1 favorite]
"Oral cock" can appear in any thread at any moment, jabberjaw. I think we'd best label every thread as NSFW!
posted by five fresh fish at 2:05 AM on June 10, 2009
posted by five fresh fish at 2:05 AM on June 10, 2009
"Is this such a pernicious problem that we needed a MeTa thread about it?"
No, this is the kind of thing that can and should be handled by MeMail...but this particular post was by Anonymous, who can't be contacted by MeMail. Hence MeTa.
posted by Bugbread at 2:36 AM on June 10, 2009
No, this is the kind of thing that can and should be handled by MeMail...but this particular post was by Anonymous, who can't be contacted by MeMail. Hence MeTa.
posted by Bugbread at 2:36 AM on June 10, 2009
The thing is, a few words shouldn't mean it's "NSFW." Really, it's your work environment that could be the problem, not Metafilter. A totally innocuous post like this could blow jobs out of the water if one asshole-cum-cock-of-the-walk happens to be your boss and wants to micro-manage or cause trouble.
What it really comes down to is simply that if they're logging your internet use or watching over your shoulder, don't slack so much at work. Otherwise, a few salty words shouldn't be considered NSFW. We shouldn't have to disguise our sex-advice questions behind luncheon euphemism like grilled cheese sandwich with a side of taters.
posted by explosion at 4:58 AM on June 10, 2009
What it really comes down to is simply that if they're logging your internet use or watching over your shoulder, don't slack so much at work. Otherwise, a few salty words shouldn't be considered NSFW. We shouldn't have to disguise our sex-advice questions behind luncheon euphemism like grilled cheese sandwich with a side of taters.
posted by explosion at 4:58 AM on June 10, 2009
I think a little too much emphasis is being place on the "work" part of "safe for work". If it was changed to "safe for everyone", would that stop the "don't slack off at work" responses?
posted by smackfu at 5:50 AM on June 10, 2009
posted by smackfu at 5:50 AM on June 10, 2009
The world doesn't revolve around your prudish workplace.
I work at the core of the Earth, for Mormons.
Oh, wait, did I say Mormons? I meant Mammon.
posted by Pollomacho at 6:43 AM on June 10, 2009
I work at the core of the Earth, for Mormons.
Oh, wait, did I say Mormons? I meant Mammon.
posted by Pollomacho at 6:43 AM on June 10, 2009
I wish people would go back to spelling it "come" instead of "cum."
posted by ignignokt at 7:59 AM on June 10, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by ignignokt at 7:59 AM on June 10, 2009 [3 favorites]
Me, too, ignignokt.
"Cum' looks so...I don't know...like text shorthand U WNNA CUM? I hate it.
posted by Grlnxtdr at 8:22 AM on June 10, 2009
"Cum' looks so...I don't know...like text shorthand U WNNA CUM? I hate it.
posted by Grlnxtdr at 8:22 AM on June 10, 2009
Cum reminds me of the explicit pulp novels my dad used to have stashed away in his nightstand. Lots of bored housewives and plumbers with big cocks. Maybe the OP of the AskMe thread can look there for advice.
Not that I, er, read them enough to know.
...
Carry on.
posted by elfgirl at 8:30 AM on June 10, 2009
Not that I, er, read them enough to know.
...
Carry on.
posted by elfgirl at 8:30 AM on June 10, 2009
"Oral cock" can appear in any thread at any moment, jabberjaw. I think we'd best label every thread as NSFW!
posted by five fresh fish at 2:05 AM on June 10 [+] [!]
I'm not talking about inside the thread. I'm talking about the top page. Jizz all you want inside of a thread.
posted by jabberjaw at 8:32 AM on June 10, 2009
The OED is shockingly chaste on the subject. But the overall writeup for "come, v." is just really great and exhaustive; I'm spent having just plowed through it.
Jizz all you want inside of a thread.
But clean up after yourself.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:33 AM on June 10, 2009 [1 favorite]
Jizz all you want inside of a thread.
But clean up after yourself.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:33 AM on June 10, 2009 [1 favorite]
But then the image tag wouldn't work
I live in a world without .
posted by nomisxid at 8:40 AM on June 10, 2009
I live in a world without .
posted by nomisxid at 8:40 AM on June 10, 2009
But clean up after yourself.
Sure, just give us an edit window.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 9:00 AM on June 10, 2009
Sure, just give us an edit window.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 9:00 AM on June 10, 2009
I'm not talking about inside the thread. I'm talking about the top page. Jizz all you want inside of a thread.
So if you hit MeFi or AskMe and one of the FPPs contains NSFW language, your ass is fired… but if you click to read more and the thread contains NSFW language, you're gold.
That makes no sense whatsoever.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:23 AM on June 10, 2009
So if you hit MeFi or AskMe and one of the FPPs contains NSFW language, your ass is fired… but if you click to read more and the thread contains NSFW language, you're gold.
That makes no sense whatsoever.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:23 AM on June 10, 2009
When I was in fifth grade Mrs. Donahue made us write an essay about our favorite song. My friend Jason did "Cum On Feel the Noize", by Quiet Riot, but he was scared to write it like that because, you know, CUM. So he wrote it out "Come On Feel The Noise".
Mrs. Donahue, bless her heart, took points off Jason's grade for not getting the title right.
Me? Lawyers in Love, natch.
posted by dirtdirt at 9:30 AM on June 10, 2009
Mrs. Donahue, bless her heart, took points off Jason's grade for not getting the title right.
Me? Lawyers in Love, natch.
posted by dirtdirt at 9:30 AM on June 10, 2009
That makes no sense whatsoever.
I think the point is that if the FPP has language that's safe for work, but is tagged NSFW because of language under the fold, then people browsing can make a decision to click the link or not in light of that.
posted by elfgirl at 9:34 AM on June 10, 2009
I think the point is that if the FPP has language that's safe for work, but is tagged NSFW because of language under the fold, then people browsing can make a decision to click the link or not in light of that.
posted by elfgirl at 9:34 AM on June 10, 2009
This is me at my twelve-year-oldest, but I've noticed recently that I'll occasionally become hyper-aware of the fact that "come" and "cum" are homophones, and hilarity ensues.
"Hey, we're marching to protest genocide in Darfur. Do you want to come?"
"Oh, you're birthday party is tomorrow? I THINK I'M GONNA COME!!!"
Mature, I know. I'm a classy guy like that.
posted by SpiffyRob at 10:18 AM on June 10, 2009
"Hey, we're marching to protest genocide in Darfur. Do you want to come?"
"Oh, you're birthday party is tomorrow? I THINK I'M GONNA COME!!!"
Mature, I know. I'm a classy guy like that.
posted by SpiffyRob at 10:18 AM on June 10, 2009
So if you hit MeFi or AskMe and one of the FPPs contains NSFW language, your ass is fired… but if you click to read more and the thread contains NSFW language, you're gold.If the front page of AskMe is going to be NSFW, then fine - that's the answer.
That makes no sense whatsoever.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:23 AM on June 10 [+] [!]
Can a mod verify that this will be the case, and perhaps post a warning somewhere on the site so users can make an educated decision before accessing* AskMe?
*Whether from work, or at a home, or at the local coffee shop - the work setting is actually irrelevant to my concerns.
posted by jabberjaw at 10:29 AM on June 10, 2009
Nevermind, found it, sort of: If sexy language is going to get you in trouble at work, generally speaking you shouldn't be browsing MeFi from work.
I'd venture to say that "How to make a guy cum when he barely fits in your mouth?" and "His cock barely fits in my mouth; how can I give better head?" are a little beyond "sexy language," and more along the lines of unnecessarily graphic depictions. I would think that "Need advice about oral sex (NSFW description inside)" is probably more akin to the tame "sexy language" jessamyn is describing.
But if that's clearly the case - that AskMe is NSFW - then I consider myself warned.
On a side note, I think the difference between naked images and graphic sexual language is thin.
posted by jabberjaw at 10:40 AM on June 10, 2009
I'd venture to say that "How to make a guy cum when he barely fits in your mouth?" and "His cock barely fits in my mouth; how can I give better head?" are a little beyond "sexy language," and more along the lines of unnecessarily graphic depictions. I would think that "Need advice about oral sex (NSFW description inside)" is probably more akin to the tame "sexy language" jessamyn is describing.
But if that's clearly the case - that AskMe is NSFW - then I consider myself warned.
On a side note, I think the difference between naked images and graphic sexual language is thin.
posted by jabberjaw at 10:40 AM on June 10, 2009
I would think that "Need advice about oral sex (NSFW description inside)" is probably more akin to the tame "sexy language" jessamyn is describing.
I'd classify that as clinical language, not 'sexy language'.
smackfu: I think a little too much emphasis is being place on the "work" part of "safe for work". If it was changed to "safe for everyone", would that stop the "don't slack off at work" responses?
It would stop those responses, yes. It wouldn't solve the problem though. Then you'd get into the sort of thing cortex mentioned, but with no real danger for the objecting party other than feeling squikked-out. If it's meant to be safe for everyone, then you'd have to go by the squik standards of the person most prone to squikkiness... in whose case even the clinical words like 'oral', 'anal', or 'breast' might be going too far.
Personally, seeing a question along the lines of "I have a big, painful boil. How can I safely lance it at home?" would make my skin crawl. Pustules give me the heebie-jeebies. But I wouldn't expect AskMe to be a pustule-free zone, especially when it has a health category.
posted by CKmtl at 11:06 AM on June 10, 2009
I'd classify that as clinical language, not 'sexy language'.
smackfu: I think a little too much emphasis is being place on the "work" part of "safe for work". If it was changed to "safe for everyone", would that stop the "don't slack off at work" responses?
It would stop those responses, yes. It wouldn't solve the problem though. Then you'd get into the sort of thing cortex mentioned, but with no real danger for the objecting party other than feeling squikked-out. If it's meant to be safe for everyone, then you'd have to go by the squik standards of the person most prone to squikkiness... in whose case even the clinical words like 'oral', 'anal', or 'breast' might be going too far.
Personally, seeing a question along the lines of "I have a big, painful boil. How can I safely lance it at home?" would make my skin crawl. Pustules give me the heebie-jeebies. But I wouldn't expect AskMe to be a pustule-free zone, especially when it has a health category.
posted by CKmtl at 11:06 AM on June 10, 2009
Also, there's a user-side way of increasing, but not guaranteeing, the SFW/SFEness of your AskMe experience: use MyAsk.
Make sure that the 'human relations' (where most of the sex questions end up) category is unchecked, and possibly 'health & fitness', 'grab bag', and 'shopping' (sex toys) as well if you really want to cover your bases. Make sure that there aren't any naughty tags in your favourite tags. Set preferences, and always load MyAsk instead of the AskMe main page.
posted by CKmtl at 11:21 AM on June 10, 2009 [2 favorites]
Make sure that the 'human relations' (where most of the sex questions end up) category is unchecked, and possibly 'health & fitness', 'grab bag', and 'shopping' (sex toys) as well if you really want to cover your bases. Make sure that there aren't any naughty tags in your favourite tags. Set preferences, and always load MyAsk instead of the AskMe main page.
posted by CKmtl at 11:21 AM on June 10, 2009 [2 favorites]
You know, that whole circumference thing has given me a problem since that question, and given that the WORLD RECORD is 6.25", I think the poster is, at the very least, using hyperbole to get her message across.
posted by misha at 11:32 AM on June 10, 2009
posted by misha at 11:32 AM on June 10, 2009
But if that's clearly the case - that AskMe is NSFW - then I consider myself warned.
There will, occasionally, be NSFW wording on the front page of AskMe. We'll fix it if we can do it easily, we won't flip out if we can't (same goes for spoilers).
the WORLD RECORD is 6.25"
I don't know if it was a record for total mass or what, but a circumference of 6.25" is a diameter of just under 2 inches. I haven't been around that much but even I know that's unlikely to be a record of any sort.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 11:46 AM on June 10, 2009
There will, occasionally, be NSFW wording on the front page of AskMe. We'll fix it if we can do it easily, we won't flip out if we can't (same goes for spoilers).
the WORLD RECORD is 6.25"
I don't know if it was a record for total mass or what, but a circumference of 6.25" is a diameter of just under 2 inches. I haven't been around that much but even I know that's unlikely to be a record of any sort.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 11:46 AM on June 10, 2009
I'd venture to say that "How to make a guy cum when he barely fits in your mouth?" and "His cock barely fits in my mouth; how can I give better head?" are a little beyond "sexy language," and more along the lines of unnecessarily graphic depictions.
Again, this is a hopelessly subjective issue once we try to accommodate degrees of taste. AskMe is potentially NSFW, just as it's potentially NSF People Who Find Topic X Viscerally Squicky and NSF Linguists and so on.
Folks doing something weird like gratuitously posting paragraph-length excerpts from slashfic above the fold will probably be getting some modly attention to their question, but that's more of a not-using-askme-right thing than a don't-be-graphic thing, and it's the sort of thing that comes up less often than plain ol' sexy/squicky/whatevery language pertinent to a good-faith question.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:50 AM on June 10, 2009
Again, this is a hopelessly subjective issue once we try to accommodate degrees of taste. AskMe is potentially NSFW, just as it's potentially NSF People Who Find Topic X Viscerally Squicky and NSF Linguists and so on.
Folks doing something weird like gratuitously posting paragraph-length excerpts from slashfic above the fold will probably be getting some modly attention to their question, but that's more of a not-using-askme-right thing than a don't-be-graphic thing, and it's the sort of thing that comes up less often than plain ol' sexy/squicky/whatevery language pertinent to a good-faith question.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:50 AM on June 10, 2009
Folks doing something weird like gratuitously posting paragraph-length excerpts from slashfic above the fold will probably be getting some modly attention
Just when cortex thought things couldn't possibly get any better, the intercom buzzed. John Hodgman casually adjusted his toga and sauntered over to see who had arrived. State your name, he intoned imperiously. It's Tavis, John. Tavis Smiley. Then we're all here, John proclaimed, with a single clap of his perfectly manicured hands. Let the games begin.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:08 PM on June 10, 2009 [1 favorite]
Just when cortex thought things couldn't possibly get any better, the intercom buzzed. John Hodgman casually adjusted his toga and sauntered over to see who had arrived. State your name, he intoned imperiously. It's Tavis, John. Tavis Smiley. Then we're all here, John proclaimed, with a single clap of his perfectly manicured hands. Let the games begin.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:08 PM on June 10, 2009 [1 favorite]
I don't know if it was a record for total mass or what, but a circumference of 6.25" is a diameter of just under 2 inches. I haven't been around that much but even I know that's unlikely to be a record of any sort.
Well, perhaps Kinsey's data needs to be updated.
Lifestyles condoms conducted their own survey (2007) and it seems to bear out the data, however. Typically, self-measurements are erroneously reported as larger than those taken in clinical studies.
It's really not important, the question just rang some bells for me (For the record, although I've been writing erotica for years, I don't have a habit of going around measuring, either!).
posted by misha at 12:14 PM on June 10, 2009
Well, perhaps Kinsey's data needs to be updated.
Lifestyles condoms conducted their own survey (2007) and it seems to bear out the data, however. Typically, self-measurements are erroneously reported as larger than those taken in clinical studies.
It's really not important, the question just rang some bells for me (For the record, although I've been writing erotica for years, I don't have a habit of going around measuring, either!).
posted by misha at 12:14 PM on June 10, 2009
You know, that whole circumference thing has given me a problem since that question, and given that the WORLD RECORD is 6.25", I think the poster is, at the very least, using hyperbole to get her message across.
Yeah, um, that's pretty certainly total bullshit. And 3.2" average? Are you kidding me? Unless they're doing hard lengths and soft circumferences, there's something very wrong with that data.
posted by Sys Rq at 12:26 PM on June 10, 2009
Yeah, um, that's pretty certainly total bullshit. And 3.2" average? Are you kidding me? Unless they're doing hard lengths and soft circumferences, there's something very wrong with that data.
posted by Sys Rq at 12:26 PM on June 10, 2009
MetaFilter: Putting the cum in circumference since 1999
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:33 PM on June 10, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:33 PM on June 10, 2009 [3 favorites]
Unionize yourself and chill.
posted by Free word order! at 12:37 PM on June 10, 2009
posted by Free word order! at 12:37 PM on June 10, 2009
I think the point is that if the FPP has language that's safe for work, but is tagged NSFW because of language under the fold, then people browsing can make a decision to click the link or not in light of that.
But my point is that every thread is potentially NSFW, because any thread might contain NSFW language regardless the "safety" of the FPP.
If words are going to get you fired, don't read MeFi at work. Heck, even with a high compliance rate for tagging NSFW appropriately there is always going to be the chance that NSFW words are going to flow across your screen.
posted by five fresh fish at 1:28 PM on June 10, 2009
But my point is that every thread is potentially NSFW, because any thread might contain NSFW language regardless the "safety" of the FPP.
If words are going to get you fired, don't read MeFi at work. Heck, even with a high compliance rate for tagging NSFW appropriately there is always going to be the chance that NSFW words are going to flow across your screen.
posted by five fresh fish at 1:28 PM on June 10, 2009
the thing that is all but glossed over in all of this is that since it's an anon question, a mod approved it. there's your answer for the huffy "should we expect the ask.me front page to be NSFW?!" - the mods felt the language was ok and approved it. furthermore, they have been pretty clear in the statement that the NSFW tag is for links and pictures, so the poster was actually exercising more caution than they really had to.
posted by nadawi at 1:36 PM on June 10, 2009
posted by nadawi at 1:36 PM on June 10, 2009
"I don't know if it was a record for total mass or what, but a circumference of 6.25" is a diameter of just under 2 inches. I haven't been around that much but even I know that's unlikely to be a record of any sort."
It's bigger around than my wrist. I dunno if it is a record, but it sure as hell better be far beyond average, or else the porn industry has a problem: their actors all have dicks thinner than their wrists, which means they're exclusively hiring guys with small dicks.
Somehow, I believe that's not the case.
posted by Bugbread at 1:44 PM on June 10, 2009
It's bigger around than my wrist. I dunno if it is a record, but it sure as hell better be far beyond average, or else the porn industry has a problem: their actors all have dicks thinner than their wrists, which means they're exclusively hiring guys with small dicks.
Somehow, I believe that's not the case.
posted by Bugbread at 1:44 PM on June 10, 2009
But if that's clearly the case - that AskMe is NSFW - then I consider myself warned.
Um, you should probably consider yourself warned about the front page of the blue as well. "Fuck" and "cum" have been showing up in front page posts - and page titles - for years now.
posted by mediareport at 1:44 PM on June 10, 2009
Um, you should probably consider yourself warned about the front page of the blue as well. "Fuck" and "cum" have been showing up in front page posts - and page titles - for years now.
posted by mediareport at 1:44 PM on June 10, 2009
I'd venture to say that "How to make a guy cum when he barely fits in your mouth?" and "His cock barely fits in my mouth; how can I give better head?" are a little beyond "sexy language," and more along the lines of unnecessarily graphic depictions.
The above bothers me more the more I think about it. Honest, realistic discussion of sex has always been one of the joys of this site. "His cock barely fits in my mouth; how can I give better head?" is not only *not* unnecessarily graphic, it's arguably the best possible way to frame the question.
posted by mediareport at 2:00 PM on June 10, 2009 [2 favorites]
The above bothers me more the more I think about it. Honest, realistic discussion of sex has always been one of the joys of this site. "His cock barely fits in my mouth; how can I give better head?" is not only *not* unnecessarily graphic, it's arguably the best possible way to frame the question.
posted by mediareport at 2:00 PM on June 10, 2009 [2 favorites]
"It's bigger around than my wrist. I dunno if it is a record, but it sure as hell better be far beyond average, or else the porn industry has a problem: their actors all have dicks thinner than their wrists, which means they're exclusively hiring guys with small dicks."
Having just measured, my wrist is 7 5/8" around, for a diameter of 2.42". I haven't ever measured, but I'm pretty sure my cock is smaller than my wrist, if only because exercising both takes more effort from the wrist. But I don't doubt that there are many, many guys whose cocks are bigger around than your wrist (or you measured wrong).
posted by klangklangston at 2:45 PM on June 10, 2009
Having just measured, my wrist is 7 5/8" around, for a diameter of 2.42". I haven't ever measured, but I'm pretty sure my cock is smaller than my wrist, if only because exercising both takes more effort from the wrist. But I don't doubt that there are many, many guys whose cocks are bigger around than your wrist (or you measured wrong).
posted by klangklangston at 2:45 PM on June 10, 2009
It's bigger around than my wrist.
Pics, or it didn't happen
posted by nomisxid at 2:59 PM on June 10, 2009
Pics, or it didn't happen
posted by nomisxid at 2:59 PM on June 10, 2009
But my point is that every thread is potentially NSFW, because any thread might contain NSFW language regardless the "safety" of the FPP.
If words are going to get you fired, don't read MeFi at work. Heck, even with a high compliance rate for tagging NSFW appropriately there is always going to be the chance that NSFW words are going to flow across your screen.
Well, remember; not everyone is all about the comments. For a lot of people, I'm sure the comments are secondary or not at all interesting -- they just come to the front page of MetaFilter to look for interesting web sites.
But of course, we're talking about AskMe, and who doesn't want to be helpful? I think if I was at work, had a few minutes to kill while my build compiled, and wanted to help someone who asked the question "My car won't start; please hope me! [more inside]" it would be nice to be able to look for such questions without running into cocks cocks cocks.
(having said that, my work doesn't care what I do with my internets)
posted by davejay at 2:59 PM on June 10, 2009
If words are going to get you fired, don't read MeFi at work. Heck, even with a high compliance rate for tagging NSFW appropriately there is always going to be the chance that NSFW words are going to flow across your screen.
Well, remember; not everyone is all about the comments. For a lot of people, I'm sure the comments are secondary or not at all interesting -- they just come to the front page of MetaFilter to look for interesting web sites.
But of course, we're talking about AskMe, and who doesn't want to be helpful? I think if I was at work, had a few minutes to kill while my build compiled, and wanted to help someone who asked the question "My car won't start; please hope me! [more inside]" it would be nice to be able to look for such questions without running into cocks cocks cocks.
(having said that, my work doesn't care what I do with my internets)
posted by davejay at 2:59 PM on June 10, 2009
"Can we get Standards and Practices down here with a tape measure?"
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:59 PM on June 10, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:59 PM on June 10, 2009 [2 favorites]
it's arguably the best possible way to frame the question.
not really. a better framing would be "can anybody recommend any effective mouth-stretching exercises?"
posted by UbuRoivas at 3:03 PM on June 10, 2009
not really. a better framing would be "can anybody recommend any effective mouth-stretching exercises?"
posted by UbuRoivas at 3:03 PM on June 10, 2009
Going on the commentary from some posters I guess we'd better stop any mention of breast feeding on ask questions, since breasts could get you fired too.
The MeFi can be just like Facebook. Whee!
posted by rodgerd at 3:22 PM on June 10, 2009
The MeFi can be just like Facebook. Whee!
posted by rodgerd at 3:22 PM on June 10, 2009
it already is like facebook in ways -like how members use fake names like "Brandon Blatcher".
posted by UbuRoivas at 3:24 PM on June 10, 2009
posted by UbuRoivas at 3:24 PM on June 10, 2009
"Having just measured, my wrist is 7 5/8" around, for a diameter of 2.42". I haven't ever measured, but I'm pretty sure my cock is smaller than my wrist, if only because exercising both takes more effort from the wrist. But I don't doubt that there are many, many guys whose cocks are bigger around than your wrist (or you measured wrong)."
I just doublechecked, and my wrist is 6.7 inches in circumference, for a diameter of 2.13 inches. If we accept that most porn actors are going to have above-average circumferences, and most porn actors, from what I can tell, have smaller circumferences than my wrist, then a circumference of 6.7 inches is somewhat greater than "above-average". Let's call it "above-above-average". So when the person claims 7 inches, I'm going to go out on a limb and say it may not be a world record (there's always some weird case involving elephantitis or the like), but it's probably a record of some sort. Largest penis in the state, for example. After all, another inch and the person's penis is coke-can sized.
posted by Bugbread at 4:30 PM on June 10, 2009
I just doublechecked, and my wrist is 6.7 inches in circumference, for a diameter of 2.13 inches. If we accept that most porn actors are going to have above-average circumferences, and most porn actors, from what I can tell, have smaller circumferences than my wrist, then a circumference of 6.7 inches is somewhat greater than "above-average". Let's call it "above-above-average". So when the person claims 7 inches, I'm going to go out on a limb and say it may not be a world record (there's always some weird case involving elephantitis or the like), but it's probably a record of some sort. Largest penis in the state, for example. After all, another inch and the person's penis is coke-can sized.
posted by Bugbread at 4:30 PM on June 10, 2009
I think all the OP is asking is that if you are using the NSFW tag, you put it on the front page of your post. Since you are already putting the tag in there, why not maximize its usefulness by putting it somewhere more visible. The OP is not demanding this, nor is s\he asking that it be made some kind of Official PolicyTM, or that the mods waste time enforcing this minor convenience for people. The request seems entirely reasonable to me. There is often a considerable difference between the NFSW-ness of the frontpage writeup on an article, and the article itself, so it seems like a very useful thing. The idea isn't to entirely eliminate every bad word, but rather to minimize the severity and occurrence of NSFW-ness. FWIW, I work at a company that is extraordinarily lax about this sort of thing (my bosses both read MeFi anyway), but to me the usefulness seems obvious.
Also, it's hard to compare the circumference of your wrist to the circumference of a penis, as a penis at its base is roughly cylindrical, while your wrist is of course oblong. You probably have cylindrical objects all around your house (beer bottles, pill bottles, maybe champagne flutes?) that you can measure the circumference of in order to get you a better idea of what 7" would look like.
posted by !Jim at 10:10 PM on June 10, 2009
Also, it's hard to compare the circumference of your wrist to the circumference of a penis, as a penis at its base is roughly cylindrical, while your wrist is of course oblong. You probably have cylindrical objects all around your house (beer bottles, pill bottles, maybe champagne flutes?) that you can measure the circumference of in order to get you a better idea of what 7" would look like.
posted by !Jim at 10:10 PM on June 10, 2009
A 12-oz beer can is 8 3/4" around; the flashlight nearest my desk is 6 1/2", which is actually pretty sizeable.
posted by klangklangston at 10:46 PM on June 10, 2009
posted by klangklangston at 10:46 PM on June 10, 2009
why not just measure the circumference created by your hand, then adjust according to whether your grip is not quite enough to get around, a bit too much, or spot on.
posted by UbuRoivas at 10:49 PM on June 10, 2009
posted by UbuRoivas at 10:49 PM on June 10, 2009
There is nothing men love more than their penises.
posted by five fresh fish at 11:22 PM on June 10, 2009
posted by five fresh fish at 11:22 PM on June 10, 2009
idunno; a good grilled cheese sandwich is right up there.
posted by UbuRoivas at 12:00 AM on June 11, 2009
posted by UbuRoivas at 12:00 AM on June 11, 2009
What's the average circumference of a grilled cheese sandwhich anyway?
posted by Bugbread at 3:33 AM on June 11, 2009
posted by Bugbread at 3:33 AM on June 11, 2009
What's the average circumference of a grilled cheese sandwhich anyway?
Depends really. For instance, I like mine on Texas Toast. Who wants a teeny-weeny panini?
posted by Pollomacho at 4:49 AM on June 11, 2009 [1 favorite]
Depends really. For instance, I like mine on Texas Toast. Who wants a teeny-weeny panini?
posted by Pollomacho at 4:49 AM on June 11, 2009 [1 favorite]
do you prefer your sandwiches intact, or with the crust cut off?
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:11 AM on June 11, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:11 AM on June 11, 2009 [3 favorites]
My wife cuts off the crust on her sandwiches. Sometimes I'll eat them.
Now I'm not going to be able to eat them without some very disturbing imagery flashing through my mind.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:42 AM on June 11, 2009
Now I'm not going to be able to eat them without some very disturbing imagery flashing through my mind.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:42 AM on June 11, 2009
Speaking of NSFW and circumference issues, there was a meeting in our office a couple of years ago and after the meeting my boss pulled me aside and said, "That guy that just left? His nickname is Coke Can." and he proceeded to tell me that the nick was based on his dick and its circumference.
Now I don't remember answers to all the questions I have now, like, How is this generally known?, Has it been verified?
I do remember being somewhat glad to not be aware of said nickname before laying eyes on the dude because it would be very difficult not to look in that direction.
Yeah, NSFW does not apply in my office.
posted by readery at 10:29 AM on June 11, 2009
Now I don't remember answers to all the questions I have now, like, How is this generally known?, Has it been verified?
I do remember being somewhat glad to not be aware of said nickname before laying eyes on the dude because it would be very difficult not to look in that direction.
Yeah, NSFW does not apply in my office.
posted by readery at 10:29 AM on June 11, 2009
He was actually called Coke Can because he fucked one once.
posted by klangklangston at 10:46 AM on June 11, 2009
posted by klangklangston at 10:46 AM on June 11, 2009
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 2:00 PM on June 9, 2009 [9 favorites]