Maybe there should be a limit on MetaTalk posts. February 21, 2002 1:39 PM   Subscribe

Suggestion: Limit users to one MetaTalk front-page post per week.
posted by rcade to Etiquette/Policy at 1:39 PM (95 comments total)

Last year, we staged an intervention for a person who was averaging more than a post a day to MetaFilter. We hounded him into starting his own weblog, and he's now so successful he can publicly repudiate us to an audience of hundreds, if not thousands.

We're getting to that point again, but this time it involves someone using MetaTalk as a personal weblog. Though we could haul out the tar and feathers until this person starts a weblog about MetaFilter (a perfect place to cast scorn upon us), I'd like to dodge the issue entirely and put a regulator on the faucet.

Aside from Matt, is there anyone on this site who needs to be heard from on the MetaTalk front page more than once a week? I don't even want to hear from myself on these topics that often -- I could go a month without needing to know what I think about MetaFilter.
posted by rcade at 1:48 PM on February 21, 2002


We're getting to that point again, but this time it involves someone using MetaTalk as a personal weblog.

Name names and maybe shame will do the job for you.
posted by ColdChef at 1:58 PM on February 21, 2002


We're getting to that point again, but this time it involves someone using MetaTalk as a personal weblog.

Is it a vegetable?
posted by iceberg273 at 2:06 PM on February 21, 2002


Personally, I draw a huge distinction between MetaTalk and MetaFilter, and have no problem with people posting to MeTa as often as they see fit. I can't explain why something that would bother me on a blue background seems ok on the brown, but it just doesn't bother me.

Just my tuppence.
posted by jpoulos at 2:08 PM on February 21, 2002


(make that my awkwardly phrased tuppence)
posted by jpoulos at 2:10 PM on February 21, 2002


I think a limit on MeTa posts is a good idea. People should really only be allowed outrage once a week. Keep their blood pressure down.
posted by anapestic at 2:31 PM on February 21, 2002


If you're going to declare a fatwa, name names. Dish the dirt else we stone the wrong guy or gal.
posted by y2karl at 2:34 PM on February 21, 2002


It's not about declaring a fatwa.

Though we could haul out the tar and feathers... I'd like to dodge the issue entirely and put a regulator on the faucet.
posted by Dean King at 2:40 PM on February 21, 2002


Sorry rcade, 'not seein' it. I just looked through the MetaTalk posts since 2-17-02 and didn't find anyone posting more than once except Miguel ... and his posts seem pretty valid and well reponded to. Am I missing something here?
posted by Wulfgar! at 2:55 PM on February 21, 2002


ok on the brown

Brown!?!?

MeTa has been stupid lately, but I can't agree it's one person's fault. All this jabbering just sucks, by everyone, across the board. I wish someone, and I think you know who I mean, would just say "Hey, MetaTalk is not your social club! Shut up!"
posted by rodii at 2:56 PM on February 21, 2002


What a good descripition, rcade. Very true.

I'm not so much in favor of limiting front page posts as I am in favor of limiting user posts. The front page isn’t the problem, the user is.

There needs to be some mechanism that makes someone who posts often get to post less, while someone who posts seldomly gets to post more. I like this because it cuts down on MetaFilter addicts without encouraging more posting. (If you're not posting at all, the ability to post more won't encourage you.)

The goal for this is to get topic posts back down to below 20 a day and keep discussions around 20 to 30 comments.
posted by raaka at 3:06 PM on February 21, 2002


The goal for this is to get topic posts back down to below 20 a day and keep discussions around 20 to 30 comments.

*scrunching of eyebrows*

And who exactly established this where? Hows that referee thing workin' out for ya'?
posted by Wulfgar! at 3:19 PM on February 21, 2002


I guess it's gray, huh? I never really thought about it.

And I think that raaka's suggestions are exactly *not* what we need. And it's not because I'm a frequent poster, either. I think all this "ban this" "ban that" banter is just...bs. Everyone seems to have elaborate plans to "fix" this place...mathematically. It just doesn't work that way. MeFi is my favorite corner of the 'net. And it got that way by being free and open, and no logarithm will fix any perceived faults. (This is ironic, yes, because six months ago I was calling for more restrictions.)
posted by jpoulos at 4:08 PM on February 21, 2002


There needs to be some mechanism that makes someone who posts often get to post less, while someone who posts seldomly gets to post more.

As for the former, it seems to me that discussions like this one are the mechanism. Nobody who likes this site enough to post here too often is going to be able to avoid the negative feedback they will eventually get.

Although, I'm in the camp of those not sure who this thread is actually about anyway. It's not me, is it? Two of my three MeTa threads may have been posted on the same day last week--one about the Los Angles MeFi gathering, another for a feature request.

As for the latter, it seems there's nothing holding non-posters back from posting more if they want to.

posted by bingo at 5:02 PM on February 21, 2002


I can think of quite a few users this thread might be about, but as someone who posts very seldomly, I might be thought of as too much of a lurker to speak. I agree with rcade, and I'm glad that I'm not the only one who noticed that it seems like some of these extra posts were a bit -- well, extra...

If something is important enough to be discussed on MetaTalk, I'm quite sure that more than one person would notice it, so no one should have to take on the responsibility of town crier and need to post more than once a day/week here. So I can't imagine that it would ruin anyone's life if MeTa posts were restricted. It might help save a few. (<-- interpret that any way you want)
posted by lnicole at 5:17 PM on February 21, 2002


I agree with rcade too.

If my guess as to who the implicated user is here is correct, I think the problem is that they are just really enthusiastic. In this case, the user isn't actually rude or obnoxious, in fact the opposite. Thus I think many people don't see it as a problem. It is hard to criticize someone who posts intelligently.

I assume by the phrasing of rcade's post that his proposed solution is for the poster to see this topic, recognize his own behavior, and alter it. Finger pointing is the last thing people need.

Of course, I could be wrong about who rcade is talking about. : )
posted by phatboy at 5:24 PM on February 21, 2002


Ummm, rcade, my man, I understand not wanting to be a snitch, but I think you better spill the beans.

[hoping it's not me]
posted by jonmc at 5:58 PM on February 21, 2002


There is a very fine line between rude and obnoxious and enthusiastic. A person who is enthusiastic, but fails to take note of gentle hints to keep the noise down becomes rude and obnoxious.

Truly, I think enthusiasm is a good thing, but should be tempered to meet the tone of the group as a whole.
posted by sillygit at 6:09 PM on February 21, 2002


[hoping it's not me]

well, it seems to me that anyone who limited themselves to one post a week would never have to worry that they were posting too often to metatalk.


posted by rebeccablood at 6:13 PM on February 21, 2002


(not saying that I think it's you, by the way. just that such a personal standard would render anyone exempt from such worries.)
posted by rebeccablood at 6:16 PM on February 21, 2002


not saying that I think it's you, by the way

Sorry, old high school reflex. When the principal comes to the door, I assume he's coming for me.
Quite frankly, I'm stumped, honestly.
posted by jonmc at 6:28 PM on February 21, 2002


I'm noticing, as a possibly relevant tangent, that the epidemic of one-liners and 'look ma I'm makin' jokes on the InTArWEb!' comments seem to have declined a bit recently since repeated admonitions 'round the place in the last week or two. Or am I imagining things?

If not, this is positive.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:52 PM on February 21, 2002


It is hard to criticize someone who posts intelligently.

Then why do it? This is just crap. If someone has crossed someone else's personal little line, then say so and be done.

well, it seems to me that anyone who limited themselves to one post a week would never have to worry that they were posting too often to metatalk.

Hmm, well. And if there are transgressions that need discussing, I guess we should all just keep a stiff upper lip about it until the weeks up, and then its all hunky dorry to blast away, yes? That way we'll know we're not the one's to be chided. Better yet, why isn't there a rule that no one can post to MetaTalk except Matt. Yeah that's the ticket.

Come on people, arbitrary rulings and allegations against the nameless are arrogant and unwarranted. Are we talking about something real here, or just pining for our lost love, MetaSilence?

I would like less noise with the signal, too, but sheesh, you can't legislate morality here, any more than any where else.
posted by Wulfgar! at 7:00 PM on February 21, 2002


wulfgar: Hmm, well. And if there are transgressions that need discussing, I guess we should all just keep a stiff upper lip about it until the weeks up

well, obviously I wasn't advocating any such thing. I merely observed what the consequences of such an action would be.

I didn't realize I was speaking to someone who goes when the light turns green, even if there's another car coming through the intersection. :)
posted by rebeccablood at 7:11 PM on February 21, 2002


Sorry rebeccablood, I just think its been a crappy day on MetaX. I leave for a while, come back, and its even more crappy. I really do like the idea of self-policing, but an arbitrary standard isn't likely to affect any but those who are willing to make that effort anyway.

I just really wish that rcade would have laid out the stakes, instead of proposing sanctions in the name of "blog nicely".
posted by Wulfgar! at 7:31 PM on February 21, 2002


It is hard to criticize someone who posts intelligently.

Then why do it? This is just crap.


Wulfgar proves Phatboy wrong in a perhaps unintentionally hilarious way.
posted by Hildago at 7:34 PM on February 21, 2002


Context, Hildago. Care to clarify?
posted by Wulfgar! at 7:44 PM on February 21, 2002


Maybe a better policy would be to limit the number of MeTa threads lamenting the state of MeTa to one per month.

It also seems odd to me that the issue here is MeTa posts and not MeFi posts. I was under the impression that MeTa was supposed to be a more relaxed environment where anyone could take MeFi-related issues or discussions that did not really belong on MeFi. I'm not sure how that can really be possible if MeTa is actually the more restrictive environment.
posted by bingo at 8:27 PM on February 21, 2002


I'm not sure how that can really be possible if MeTa is actually the more restrictive environment.

bingo , Bingo!
posted by Wulfgar! at 9:14 PM on February 21, 2002


rcade -- as calling people out goes, I think you pulled it off very gently.

I had an email exchange with the poster quite obviously (right?) in question about this very issue this very morning. I think he's going to lay off posting a bit.

Check it out, we're all still friends! Way to go, Cadenhead.
posted by palegirl at 10:04 PM on February 21, 2002


Suggestion: offer suggestions only when they hold water. MeFi's already got enough restrictions. No need to restrict MeTa too.

I've been using MetaTalk as a weblog for years but since nothing ever happens in my life, no one's noticed.
posted by ZachsMind at 10:17 PM on February 21, 2002


To be honest, I never thought MetaTalk would be very popular. In the first few months, it sort of served as my personal to-do list, as there would be 4-5 bug reports a week, maybe 1 or 2 feature requests, and once in a while a etiquette question. I think some people are using this area as the chatroom and their blog, as evidenced by some unimportant seeming threads posted here getting 30+ comments, mostly of people one-upping each other with the giggles and goofs.

That being said, I've been meaning to institute the same once per 24hrs limit and one week membership for posting here.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:46 PM on February 21, 2002


Proposal:
Leave this thread alone until Rcade names somebody. If he doesn't, ignore the thread until such time.
This is getting ridiculous.
Rcade: I generally like your posts, but I'm sorry, this just makes you look like a halfass. Who are you talking about? I find it relatively obvious(though this is based on my own perception, and it's not my place or anyone else's to speak for you), but lots of other people seem to be having a problem deducting. Out with it.

Other than that that, I see no particular reason for MeTa not having the same posting limitations as the main page. I think I'd probably just assumed it did.
posted by Su at 11:16 PM on February 21, 2002


Can we be a little less totalitarian, please? I lived under a fascist dictatorship until I was 19, had all my radio programmes go through the State censor, was interrogated by the secret police, PIDE, expelled at 15 for playing Elton John's "The King Is Dead" and James Taylor's "Soldiers" and then arrested for two days because I tried to write about it in a music magazine.

This used to be their style. But all you have to do is read Kafka and Orwell to be aware of it. So let's start naming names. Palegirl sent me what I thought was a friendly and personal email saying I was posting too much. Namely, more than anybody else.

I liked palegirl and respected her honesty so I replied OK, I agreed, I'll restrain myself. Ever since I joined MetaFilter, which I love and enjoy more and more as time goes by, I've tried to curb my enthusiasm and learn from my mistakes. If you look at my posting history over these last six months you'll see I've been posting less and less. Still way too much, but on the right track. I'll get there in the end and, in the mean time, thanks to all who have patiently (and impatiently!)helped, find my own equilibrium.

Though I understand some people think I'm now posting too much to MeTa, I find this anonymous method loathsome. It turns out palegirl now publicly tells rcade she's emailed "the poster in question" and that he's going to tone it down. And she praises the "gentleness" of this sinister, wink-wink approach, where others(like jonmc and bingo)who post to MeTa end up thinking they might be the accused. Rest easy, my brothers - your time will probably come too, but, for now, it's little old me.

At least the fascists named names. I only know it's me because palegirl let the kitty out of the bag - while keeping everyone else uninformed. Oh lookit the little kitty-like conspiracy, patting itself on the back. Eeww. I think that's sinister, never mind contrary to the MetaFilter spirit.

As I don't need to be treated gently, and often haven't - what a short memory you have, palegirl! - and welcome open debate, naming names and absolute freedom, I've decided to go on as I have been doing, accepting advice from the many people I trust here, who've helped me learn the ropes and not get on too many people's nerves. This thread itself has helped me a good deal - thanks.

My posts on MeFI are mainly not from news sources or taken from other blogs. I try to make them interesting and dig up links that otherwise might have gone unnoticed. My posts here on MeTa are well-intentioned and related to MetaFilter. Yet their quality is not discussed. Rather, their quantity. I find that sad. Good things are good in large quantities, bad ones in small quantities. My posts may not be good but I want them to be and will keep trying to make them better.

Yet even if there was the limit Matt now proposes for MeTa - which I agree with entirely - I'd be within it. Over the last six months I've posted 2-3 times a week to MeTa.

I firmly believe in following the rules - and have. If the rules change I'll gladly accept them. But I'm certainly not going to try and guess what rcade, palegirl, raaka and others who won't name names have in their minds as being "acceptable" and try to follow that! At least raaka spelled out his limits. Though I'd hate to want to make a comment and find the thread had already reached it's quota of 30 or 40 or whatever it was.

Funny isn't it. that what I thought was one friendly email accomplished something that this anonymous sort of accusation then undid?

So thank you, but no thank you. As for being enthusiastic, polite and intelligent, well, I can live with that too. ;)
posted by MiguelCardoso at 1:47 AM on February 22, 2002 [1 favorite]


Limiting user posts would achieve optimal readability.

If you think more (or less) posting is optimal then you disagree with me. I’m not about to get all junior high and start calling someone who disagrees with me names—we just have a difference of opinion. Your disagreement isn't that big a deal to me, but others just can't seem to stomach it.

I'd like to see less posts on MetaFilter. Hate me!

I thought expressing opinions on matters MetaFilter was called community policing. Maybe it is, but it will get you compared to Salazar.

“I only know it's me because palegirl let the kitty out of the bag”

Self-flagellating will certainly get you compared to Arthur Dimmesdale. I didn't name a single source of the problem because I don’t think there is a single source of the problem. It’s sitewide, it’s endemic. Ditto people who are making few great posts and great comments. There is no single source. I can’t single any one person out because there are many people doing it.

Besides, wasn't there a MetaTalk thread a few days ago in which people were complaining about singling people out? All this shows me is that there truly is no satsifying everyone.
posted by raaka at 4:11 AM on February 22, 2002


I'm not going to name anyone now for the same reason I didn't originally -- it's not the point. I'm not clear on how that's worse than fascism, but I will say that any totalitarian state in which James Taylor is illegal can't be all bad.

I think a one post per week limit would stop MetaTalk from being used as a personal weblog, curb the ongoing effort to turn it into an IRC channel, and discourage some of the more petty grievances that are aired here.

Though the irony is amusing -- half the people post here to make MetaFilter more restrictive; the other half post here because it's less restrictive -- limiting posts seems like a better idea than starting MetaMetaTalk.
posted by rcade at 5:57 AM on February 22, 2002


How about just one dedicated, never-ending thread that is just about how much MetaFOO sucks and we can all go there and bitch whenever we feel the need to without always having to start a new thread (kind of like 1142 but with less pancakes). Then everyone knows where to go to complain, and we don't get the all the clutter.

In principle I don't think it's bad that there is jocularity afoot in MeTa. Every other web forum/community I've ever participated in has had a "lounge" separate from the topical areas for people to generally chit-chat and goof, but they usually keep the etiquette/policy/dispute/complaint thing distinct from the "lounge" thing. MeTa just has all of it in one space.

I'd be glad to see a walling-off between the two rather than a suppression of the "lounge"-y stuff, and no posting restrictions on either.
posted by briank at 6:28 AM on February 22, 2002


My God, this is about Miguel?

For crying out loud, if I logged onto MeFi and didn't find 400 items from Miguel I'd be concerned.
Sure, he's a bit of a Chatty Kathy, but it's usually interesting chat. And Miguel is the only Mefi'er whom I've never seen be discourteous or flip out on anyone. No disrespect rcade, but I honestly think there's more important things to worry about.

posted by jonmc at 6:52 AM on February 22, 2002 [1 favorite]


Maybe Metafilter could benefit from having a third, social-orientated "lounge" section. Someone's leaving Mefi? Take it to the lounge. Someone's picking on someone else? Take it to the lounge. You're missing long-gone posters? Take it to the lounge.

That kinda thing.
posted by kv at 6:55 AM on February 22, 2002


I think calling MetaTalk totalitarian is absurd, not to mention insulting, Miguel. Rcade doesn't have any power to punish you here, and that's not his intention, anyway. He was just making a suggestion, politely. If you go back over MeTa for a few months, you'll see that there are periods where other people were posting too frequently. Since his suggestion was meant to cover more than just you, nothing would have been gained by his naming names. Your jail time is not relevant here.

As for the quality/quantity issue, they can't be entirely separated. At some point, signal becomes noise if there's too much of it. I would rather see ten good posts and ten bad posts on the front page than thirty good posts and fifteen bad posts. If there are thirty good posts, I'm likely to miss the best one because I'm overwhelmed by signal.

I suppose it's good that there's so much of MeFi for the people who have nothing else to do, but I don't think that's most of us. It's just the most vocal of us.
posted by anapestic at 7:00 AM on February 22, 2002


For all those who think this thread is about you:

Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they arent' out to get you.

Or something like that.
posted by adampsyche at 7:23 AM on February 22, 2002


Clearing throat...and using only three dots for the ellipse...

let he-or she-who is without sin cast the first stone.

Lay off the Evil Twin...it had not been noticed from On High that he had been posting that much...for one thing, the posts had been Quality, surrounded by just so much mediocrity, wind, and hot air.

I have noticed that the level of insufferable pomposity has not gone down in my absence.

And don't assume I'm back either.
posted by bunnyfire at 7:33 AM on February 22, 2002


Oh fer chrissakes, bunny -- either stay or go away. I don't care which, but pick one.
posted by ook at 7:49 AM on February 22, 2002


it involves someone using MetaTalk as a personal weblog. Though we could haul out the tar and feathers until this person starts a weblog about MetaFilter

Oops, sorry. I wasn't calling anyone totalitarian, much less good old freedom loving MetaTalk. What is totalitarian is the method of nameless persecution. You go "a certain someone is abusing MetaTalk needs to be tar and feathered". You defend yourself from rebuttals( as no one can know who you mean) but let the threat affect as many as possible. Thus, bingo and jonmc(and other enthusiasts probably)thinking it was about them. That's totalitarian.

Even the reaction "who are they talking about?" is a typical desired result of this totalitarian tactic. The classic formulation: "Certain elements who shall remain nameless are trying to curtail the advance of the proletariat..."

In any case, I overpost to MetaFilter more than I do to MetaTalk and though I need to work on both, it's definitely MetaFilter which I must concentrate on. ;)
posted by MiguelCardoso at 7:51 AM on February 22, 2002


Oops, sorry. I wasn't calling anyone totalitarian, much less good old freedom loving MetaTalk.

Then what was this:

Can we be a little less totalitarian, please?

Totalitarian:

Of, relating to, being, or imposing a form of government in which the political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life, the individual is subordinated to the state, and opposing political and cultural expression is suppressed: “A totalitarian regime crushes all autonomous institutions in its drive to seize the human soul” (Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.).

The use of gossip and vague references may well exist in totalitarian regimes, but it is hardly limited to them; even the most open and democratic of societies have rumor and innuendo, which I don't think we really had here. "Totalitarian" is an extremely harsh word to use and wholly inappropriate to MeTa generally and to this post in particular.
posted by anapestic at 8:04 AM on February 22, 2002


Ook, for all you know I could be renting my password out -daily/weekly/monthly rates. Discount for mefi spouses...

That could even explain the higher caliber of front page posting, hmm......
posted by bunnyfire at 8:14 AM on February 22, 2002


I have noticed that the level of insufferable pomposity has not gone down in my absence.

What absence?

And don't assume I'm back either.

See above. This just really amounts to chumming for attention.
posted by Skot at 8:19 AM on February 22, 2002


bunnyfire recently changed her profile to add the words, "Kaycee Nicole said to tell you hello." Considering that she joined right after that hoax and shares a lot of the same tendencies as the undead zombie diarist (overemotive, attention starved, never hesitant to share health woes, championed by chatty empathetic continentals), I'm beginning to think we're being trolled by one of the true masters of the art.
posted by rcade at 8:24 AM on February 22, 2002


Ook, for all you know I could be renting my password out -daily/weekly/monthly rates.

Hypocrite.
posted by j.edwards at 8:24 AM on February 22, 2002


Ook, for all you know I could be renting my password out -daily/weekly/monthly rates.

This could be tested by examining the rate of psuedo-ellipsis use over time.
posted by iceberg273 at 8:24 AM on February 22, 2002


MeTa: Just when you think they're out, they get pulled right back in.
posted by macadamiaranch at 8:26 AM on February 22, 2002


bunnyfire, if you were renting out your password, your passive-aggressive "Notice meeeeeeeeee!" attitude wouldn't be so consistent.

I mean, c'mon. I thought you were fine while you were here. I could even almost buy your histrionic departure, if you'd stuck to your guns. But this "I am no longer a member of the MeFi community, but I reserve the right to snipe at it from afar" is just bull.

Enough of this sidetrack. Now back to harassing the real enemy of the people, Miguel. sarcasm, of course
posted by ook at 8:28 AM on February 22, 2002


maybe we really ought to stop kidding ourselves about "contributing to the community" and instead obey our own interests. don't post anything on metafilter or metatalk out of obligation; post it out of personal interest. if you're still posting too much, then maybe it's time to examine the wisdom of having so much of your time devoted to metafilter.
posted by moz at 8:29 AM on February 22, 2002


i should clarify that means can the etiquette crap because it might bother one or two others here; only post when it pisses you off, and be honest that it does.
posted by moz at 8:30 AM on February 22, 2002


Anapestic:

I said sorry because I intended the construction "can we be a little less totalitarian?", including myself as it does, to be general enough not to be targetted at anyone. Apparently it was badly phrased and so misconstrued. Perhaps it sounded patronizing in a nanny sort of way: "shall we take our medicine now?" I guess it might. Well, in Latin the second person plural is never ironic. Anyway. So I apologized. That's all. But just for the fun of this singular/plural quibble, you wrote:

Since his suggestion was meant to cover more than just you, nothing would have been gained by his naming names

But rcade specifically said in the singular "someone(...)this person". So it was meant to cover one. And even if it were meant to cover two, three or four, why couldn't he name names?

Hell, MetaFilter is all about naming names! On the other hand...no, just kidding.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 8:34 AM on February 22, 2002


But yes, OK, I grant you "totalitarian" was far too harsh. ;)
posted by MiguelCardoso at 8:37 AM on February 22, 2002


Miguel, I apologise to you in advance for interrupting your totatitarian thread...we who are about to be flamed salute you.

In my hiatus I picked up a teflon suit. The advantage to it is that all this imputing of motives you people insist on doing to me now slide off nicely and hit the ground with a satisfying thud.

Please pick up your own litter when you leave.

I am here to post opinions like everyone else, no apologies, no prisoners. Consider yourselves warned. This is the last I shall ever say on the topic. If you bring it up, you will be talking to yourself, and people may think you are crazy.

Now, I think we are discussing Miguel, and his endearing habits of posting. I rather like it when he uses the word totalitarian. He is probably one of the few here with true experience of it firsthand, and I believe that gives him the right to the term.

So there.
posted by bunnyfire at 8:54 AM on February 22, 2002


Wait....so first this thread was about Miguel, and now it's back to being about bunnyfire...how long do we have to wait for someone to turn it into a thread about aaron?

(thank god, Steven Den Beste is gone, or we'd have to give him a turn, too)
posted by briank at 8:58 AM on February 22, 2002


It's like a MeTa All-Star Game!
posted by briank at 8:58 AM on February 22, 2002


Bunnyfire, you are nothing more nor less than a drama queen.
posted by anapestic at 8:59 AM on February 22, 2002


*sigh*
posted by ook at 9:11 AM on February 22, 2002


The reservoir of sympathy I (inexplicably) have for Bunnyfire is drying up rapidly.
posted by rodii at 9:12 AM on February 22, 2002


(Well, she got her wish... she's famous now, for better or worse...)

posted by ook at 9:13 AM on February 22, 2002


I picked up a teflon suit

Please pick up your own litter when you leave.

Welcome to the bunnyfire cliche festival. Seriously ,bunny, when you were here I was one of your defenders, but make up your mind.
posted by jonmc at 9:18 AM on February 22, 2002


Further to rcade's (brilliant) speculation -- note Bunnyfire's apparent off-the-cuff knowledge of rare cancers.
posted by Mid at 9:19 AM on February 22, 2002


I would like to state, for the record, that I have ceased to exist, except for those instances when I do, in fact, exist, and whether I exist or not, I am no longer going to deal with the ramifications of existance.

*attempts to walk through a wall*
posted by iceberg273 at 9:19 AM on February 22, 2002


OK, that's it. This place is so stupid. It's driving me crazy. The jokes, the casual cruelty, the lack of respect......I've had it. I QUIT. GOODBYE!
posted by rodii at 9:20 AM on February 22, 2002


Hi guys, I'm back. What did I miss?
posted by rodii at 9:21 AM on February 22, 2002


Welcome back, rodii!
posted by MiguelCardoso at 9:22 AM on February 22, 2002


Rodii, this site wasn't the same without you. I was going to say something during your absence, but now that you are back, it seems only right to tell you how important it is to have a Wolverine opinion here at MetaFilter. Even though I bleed Green and White, I value your opinion. All of East Lansing, does, really.
posted by iceberg273 at 9:28 AM on February 22, 2002


[Editor's note: Please forgive the interruption of your normally scheduled programming interruption while we briefly return to the purported purpose of this thread.]

Well, no one here (in this thread) has actually said anything about Miguel Cardoso's actual posting behavior. So I really don't think there's any need to defend it. If someone has a problem with something Cardoso has posted, just fucking say so, and say why.

And I haven't seen anyone using MeTa as a "personal weblog", either -- and no one has suggested anything I might be missing. There is a sinister, if not totalitarian echo to all this: Figurehead says, "There is EVIL among us. Seek it out, we should destroy it." Then everyone goes and finds something they think is "evil", though of course no one has told them what that means. The only result is that one are two people are made examples of, and everyone is afraid of being turned in.

That's not going to help anything. It's not even worth thinking about.

[As you were.]
posted by mattpfeff at 9:32 AM on February 22, 2002


...no apologies, no prisoners. Consider yourselves warned.
oooohh... shakin'...

MeFi(Ta) Pro=killfiles?
posted by Dean King at 9:41 AM on February 22, 2002


Hi guys, I'm back. What did I miss?

It's been a tumultuous minute, Rodii. Matt closed the site, archived all the posts on SportsFilter, and then lit himself on fire in protest over the treatment of Belarussian stray dogs. After that, Miguel emigrated to the US under the name "Destiny Longhand" and wrested control of the site over to himself using a series of brilliant legal maneuvers and a jujitsu match against serious contender Neale, who seemed hampered by his negligee.

Then things got weird. Derek Powazek tearfully confessed that the user "Bunnyfire" was, in fact, an ELIZA program that he had carefully crafted to unhinge Matt, and rued the day he created it. Jason Kottke consoled him, and the last I heard, they were getting high out behind the gym with Y6Y6Y6. SapphireBlue and Owillis revealed that, in fact, they are SuperTwins; SB has the power to assume the form of any type of cheese she wishes, and Owillis has complimentary fondue powers. Rcade mounted an insurrection against odd numbers, and won, despite a spirited defense by dhartung. Lives were lost. History was made. A rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouched toward Bethlehem to be born.
posted by Skot at 9:41 AM on February 22, 2002


Okay okay okay. Bunnyfire's profile now reads "I'm back. Get over it." And I for one suggest we do just that.

We've all posted things we regretted later, and I can easily imagine a dark enough mood and a too-itchy "Post" finger causing me to stamp my widdle feet and announce my departure as well... that is, if it hadn't already been so amply demonstrated what a bad idea it is. (and not just by Bunnyfire, that.)

Not that I'm defending any of her behavior over the past 5 days. I just don't want anyone else picking up the clue that it's an easy road to notoriety.
posted by ook at 9:51 AM on February 22, 2002


Oh look - breakfast, that pre-prandial olive and all of my bouillabaise lunch all represented in living colour on my Nokia screen! Add "suing Skot becomes principal alternative pastime" to that minute's end review.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 9:55 AM on February 22, 2002


rodii: Don't you ever leave us high 'n' dry like that!
posted by riffola at 9:56 AM on February 22, 2002


I like Miguel's posts, and I don't wish there were any less of them. I've gone back and read some of his early stuff, and it seems that what he's been faulted for most is posting about how great MetaFilter is! There may be greater demons.
posted by bingo at 10:16 AM on February 22, 2002


We've all posted things we regretted later...

I've never regretted one thing I've posted here.


*snort*
Heh. That was just fun to type out loud like that.
posted by dong_resin at 10:20 AM on February 22, 2002


God, I missed you guys so much!
posted by rodii at 10:23 AM on February 22, 2002


God, I missed you guys so much!

rodii, it's all about you, isn't it? Well, you got the attention that you wanted. I hope that you are happy with yourself.
posted by Avogadro at 10:33 AM on February 22, 2002


And you look damned good in that teflon suit, Rodii.
posted by anapestic at 10:33 AM on February 22, 2002


Teflon suit? Fuck that, I'm getting one of these, just to be safe.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 11:11 AM on February 22, 2002


Actually Miguel, that looks pretty fucking cool.

The closer we can simulate the physical and emotional dynamics of real assaults, the better we can train to effectively deal with them.

It's not so much to defend yourself in a realistic situation, as it is to let loose with full force in a simulated situation.
posted by bingo at 11:15 AM on February 22, 2002


Oh yes, bingo. As soon as it arrives I'm posting a "Why is it always about briank?" thread, just to get my own back.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 11:19 AM on February 22, 2002


That and the fact that Steven Den Beste is waiting in the wings.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 11:29 AM on February 22, 2002


Okay, Miguel, but I have one of these suits!
posted by briank at 11:37 AM on February 22, 2002


Skot: Cheese transmutations, martial arts, negligees and Yeats, all in one post.

You do, in fact, rule.

posted by ebarker at 11:50 AM on February 22, 2002


Dammit, Briank - outflanked again. Yet looking at the materials your suit is made of, namely:

Fireproof rubber exterior (from Minnesota)
Titanium outer plates (from Hamilton, Ont.)
Suit joints made of chain mail (from France)
Tek plastic inner shell (from Japan)


I can safely say that the outer plates, being Canadian, will think they're inner knives and forks and not work and that the French suit joins will just run and run...
posted by MiguelCardoso at 11:50 AM on February 22, 2002


I lived under a fascist dictatorship until I was 19, had all my radio programmes go through the State censor...Okay Miguel, your'e not the only one here who grew up in Alabama. Then things got weird: Skot, please send me one ounce, checks in the mail.
Welcome back, Bunnyfire! The beauty of this place is that people have a place to vent and after a while the thread degeneration is such that it all works out. Contrary to the naysayers, MetaFilter is IMHO better than ever, thanks in large part to MetaTalk; 'quality' is subjective, but there is always something for everyone, an eclectic mix of links and usually very high caliber comments whose tone has, I feel, been raised of late. And when it comes to the hot button issues, don't believe that everyone's opinion is carved in stone. Well thought out comments for or against some of these have given me reason to think and investigate and begin to understand the platform from which others see issues differently.
posted by Mack Twain at 11:58 AM on February 22, 2002


mathowie: I think some people are using this area as the chatroom and their blog, as evidenced by some unimportant seeming threads posted here getting 30+ comments, mostly of people one-upping each other with the giggles and goofs.

rcade: I think a one post per week limit would stop MetaTalk from being used as a personal weblog, curb the ongoing effort to turn it into an IRC channel, and discourage some of the more petty grievances that are aired here.

Scrolling upward, I see that some who disagree with the statements I cited have really been making a great argument this morning for their side. This discussion was derailed in nearly record time! GOOO team!

No matter who this thread ended up really being about (and aren't we sick of threads about people? be a cam girl if you need that much attention), the matter is still important, at least to some of us. It's important to me. And no, I'm not leaving. You people aren't driving me away with your madness.

Mack Twain: "The beauty of this place is that people have a place to vent"

I don't completely disagree with this, but I think a question that's on the table (or should be) is what are we here to vent about? People can take it to e-mail or irc or AIM or blog comments if they want to vent about their cat dying or their health or the temperature of their maple syrup on that morning's breakfast. The rest of us shouldn't have to wade through the water to squeeze a worthwhile discussion out of any of that.
posted by lnicole at 12:06 PM on February 22, 2002



posted by aaron at 1:39 PM on February 22, 2002


Miguel and I are soooo gonna kick your ass in that get-up, aaron...

hahahahahahahaha!
posted by briank at 1:55 PM on February 22, 2002


Not only that, Aaron, but the light blue "My First Sony" will be the first thing to go.(The bush and the map me and briank will have to think about...).
posted by MiguelCardoso at 3:01 PM on February 22, 2002


Unless it's a Jamaican flag or something.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 3:07 PM on February 22, 2002


So that's how you stop a Cheesehead from spoiling.
posted by Kafkaesque at 3:13 PM on February 22, 2002


« Older Comment bug   |   What's with shit weasel? Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments