Duckface = bad and Upside Down Smiles = Good? December 16, 2009 8:34 AM Subscribe
I don't see the difference between the deleted duckface photos thread and the upside down photos thread. Can somebody explain to me why one got the boot and the other didn't?
What he said. The duckface post was pretty much "ha ha look at these fuckers", whereas the upside down post is "here's a bunch of art photographs involving willing participants". There's no patina of shittiness to the latter.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:39 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:39 AM on December 16, 2009
Really? You know you are supposed to turn your monitor upside down, right? That's the difference.
posted by Elmore at 8:39 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by Elmore at 8:39 AM on December 16, 2009
Yeah, they couldn't be any more different. One is kind of amazing and well-shot, the other is just horrible and mocking.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 8:40 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by mathowie (staff) at 8:40 AM on December 16, 2009
Just need pb and vacapinta to weigh in and we've got another of those 5 mods threads!
I think the first post could have been done fine if the same photographer had taken all the shots and had asked people to make that face.
posted by cjorgensen at 8:53 AM on December 16, 2009
I think the first post could have been done fine if the same photographer had taken all the shots and had asked people to make that face.
posted by cjorgensen at 8:53 AM on December 16, 2009
FIIIIIIIVE MOOOOOOD THREAD!
Four flame outs
Three Self-links
Two You-tube Posts
And a dick in a chicken for me.
sorry
posted by The Whelk at 8:55 AM on December 16, 2009 [87 favorites]
Four flame outs
Three Self-links
Two You-tube Posts
And a dick in a chicken for me.
sorry
posted by The Whelk at 8:55 AM on December 16, 2009 [87 favorites]
Your question has already been answered, but I'm still curious, why did you start this thread? Are you pro-duckface or anti-upside down face?
posted by daniel_charms at 8:57 AM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by daniel_charms at 8:57 AM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
A patina of shittiness is a surface layer of something that shares qualities with shit, so it's a milder than full-on shittiness.. A patina of shit would mean they actually used the server as toilet paper. Which seems like it would kinda chafe.
posted by echo target at 8:57 AM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by echo target at 8:57 AM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
The duckface one was to a mildly amusing spammy blog but was deleted because someone deserving might get their feelings hurt. The upside down photos link is digg pandering weaksauce crap, but will remain because it's, like, art, man.
posted by bunnytricks at 9:01 AM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by bunnytricks at 9:01 AM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
Since that's resolved, are we supposed to spend the rest of the thread making fun of Irontom?
posted by chunking express at 9:03 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by chunking express at 9:03 AM on December 16, 2009
The Art versus Crap debate will never be resolved.
posted by Elmore at 9:05 AM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by Elmore at 9:05 AM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
To be fair, the people featured on the MySpace site look like a bunch of total assholes.
posted by xmutex at 9:07 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by xmutex at 9:07 AM on December 16, 2009
bunnytricks: "The duckface one was to a mildly amusing spammy blog but was deleted because someone deserving might get their feelings hurt. The upside down photos link is digg pandering weaksauce crap, but will remain because it's, like, art, man"
Yes, and a spammy blog isn't digg pandering because lord knows digg doesn't have a huge culture of making its members feel superior by pointing out people who are Doing Things That We Don't. Get in the hell.
posted by boo_radley at 9:07 AM on December 16, 2009 [4 favorites]
Yes, and a spammy blog isn't digg pandering because lord knows digg doesn't have a huge culture of making its members feel superior by pointing out people who are Doing Things That We Don't. Get in the hell.
posted by boo_radley at 9:07 AM on December 16, 2009 [4 favorites]
Presentation fucking matters.
posted by BeerFilter at 9:10 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by BeerFilter at 9:10 AM on December 16, 2009
Semantics question: wouldn't any patina such as the one you describe simply be a patina of shit rather than shittiness?
I'd argue that the notion of a patina of shit has some specific visceral connotations that bind more strongly to the physical notion of feces than does the abstract notion of shittiness—when people are shitty to one another, for example, it rarely involves actual offal—and so, a patina of shittiness is distinct, semantically, from a patina of shit.
You could argue that something could have a "patina of shit" in a non-visceral sense if that thing merely glossed as notably bad, e.g. as being "a bit shit" or "shit work", but in the case of the duckface post there was beyond or aside from that angle the explicit being-bad-to-other-people shaming element, and that's the core of my allegation of it having a shitty quality: not that it was (or was merely) badly made ("it's shit"), but that it was premised on treating other badly ("the blogger was being shitty").
If the duckface post had been merely of a bad but person-neutral blog, "a patina of shit" might work. But even at that, I think the notion of a thin layer being spread upon something is too evocative to make the strongly physical direct form "shit" not distract.
And stuff.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:11 AM on December 16, 2009 [9 favorites]
I'd argue that the notion of a patina of shit has some specific visceral connotations that bind more strongly to the physical notion of feces than does the abstract notion of shittiness—when people are shitty to one another, for example, it rarely involves actual offal—and so, a patina of shittiness is distinct, semantically, from a patina of shit.
You could argue that something could have a "patina of shit" in a non-visceral sense if that thing merely glossed as notably bad, e.g. as being "a bit shit" or "shit work", but in the case of the duckface post there was beyond or aside from that angle the explicit being-bad-to-other-people shaming element, and that's the core of my allegation of it having a shitty quality: not that it was (or was merely) badly made ("it's shit"), but that it was premised on treating other badly ("the blogger was being shitty").
If the duckface post had been merely of a bad but person-neutral blog, "a patina of shit" might work. But even at that, I think the notion of a thin layer being spread upon something is too evocative to make the strongly physical direct form "shit" not distract.
And stuff.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:11 AM on December 16, 2009 [9 favorites]
a pooptina, if you will. I'm guessing you won't.
posted by boo_radley at 9:15 AM on December 16, 2009 [5 favorites]
posted by boo_radley at 9:15 AM on December 16, 2009 [5 favorites]
"Four flame outs" scans wrong - needs an extra syllable.
12 Lurkers lurking
11 Askers asking
10 Plates a-beaning
9 Ladies Gaga
8 Trolls A-Trolling.
7 Swains a-skimming
6 Ads a-viral
FIIIIIVE MOOOOOOOD THREAD!
Four sock puppets
Three Self-Links
Two You-tube Posts
And a dick in a chicken for me.
posted by idiopath at 9:16 AM on December 16, 2009 [53 favorites]
12 Lurkers lurking
11 Askers asking
10 Plates a-beaning
9 Ladies Gaga
8 Trolls A-Trolling.
7 Swains a-skimming
6 Ads a-viral
FIIIIIVE MOOOOOOOD THREAD!
Four sock puppets
Three Self-Links
Two You-tube Posts
And a dick in a chicken for me.
posted by idiopath at 9:16 AM on December 16, 2009 [53 favorites]
Did you try clearing your cookies? (Just upping the mod count.)
posted by pb (staff) at 9:24 AM on December 16, 2009 [15 favorites]
posted by pb (staff) at 9:24 AM on December 16, 2009 [15 favorites]
12 Cookies Cooking!
Hey, the clipart santa and snowman dancing on askme surprised me and put a goofy smile on my face. Thanks, mods. Thods.
posted by boo_radley at 9:25 AM on December 16, 2009
Hey, the clipart santa and snowman dancing on askme surprised me and put a goofy smile on my face. Thanks, mods. Thods.
posted by boo_radley at 9:25 AM on December 16, 2009
**looking up from 18-foot-tall stack of papers and exams to grade**
**scrolling through thread**
**giggling**
**briefly contemplating suicide**
**returning to 18-foot-tall stack of papers and exams**
posted by FelliniBlank at 9:26 AM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
**scrolling through thread**
**giggling**
**briefly contemplating suicide**
**returning to 18-foot-tall stack of papers and exams**
posted by FelliniBlank at 9:26 AM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
I was dismayed that the duckface post got the hook, if only because it gave me a chance to say "YOU THREW PIECES OF BREAD AT THE KID?! STEPH, HE'S NOT A REAL DUCK!"
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:28 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:28 AM on December 16, 2009
Just shy of a pentamod singularity. Where are you vacapinta?
posted by Babblesort at 9:29 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by Babblesort at 9:29 AM on December 16, 2009
Oh! I was holding my iPhone upside-
.ʇıɯɯɐp 'ʇıɐʍ 'uʍop-
posted by Pronoiac at 9:30 AM on December 16, 2009
.ʇıɯɯɐp 'ʇıɐʍ 'uʍop-
posted by Pronoiac at 9:30 AM on December 16, 2009
The duckface one was to a mildly amusing spammy blog but was deleted because someone deserving might get their feelings hurt.
Who, exactly, deserves to get their feelings hurt? I can't think of anyone but maybe I have a limited imagination.
posted by muddgirl at 9:32 AM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Who, exactly, deserves to get their feelings hurt? I can't think of anyone but maybe I have a limited imagination.
posted by muddgirl at 9:32 AM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
I don't see the difference between the deleted duckface photos thread and the upside down photos thread.
That's be cause you have no taste.
The upside down photos were interesting. The way being upside down changes your face in subtle ways, moving people ever so slightly towards the uncanny valley in a way -- you know there's something wrong but you have no idea what. It's something new and the photos were well done.
The duckface thing was derivative and boring and old.
posted by delmoi at 9:34 AM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
That's be cause you have no taste.
The upside down photos were interesting. The way being upside down changes your face in subtle ways, moving people ever so slightly towards the uncanny valley in a way -- you know there's something wrong but you have no idea what. It's something new and the photos were well done.
The duckface thing was derivative and boring and old.
posted by delmoi at 9:34 AM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
"Who, exactly, deserves to get their feelings hurt?"
Bad boys and girls who should feel very bad about what they've done.
posted by idiopath at 9:35 AM on December 16, 2009
Bad boys and girls who should feel very bad about what they've done.
posted by idiopath at 9:35 AM on December 16, 2009
That's be cause you have no taste.
Tact, thy name isn't delmoi.
I respect demoi for calling it like he sees it. He's a straight-shooter. A man of the people.
A potential running-mate for Pain in 2012?
posted by GuyZero at 9:46 AM on December 16, 2009
Tact, thy name isn't delmoi.
I respect demoi for calling it like he sees it. He's a straight-shooter. A man of the people.
A potential running-mate for Pain in 2012?
posted by GuyZero at 9:46 AM on December 16, 2009
To be fair, people who duckface deserve a smack.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:46 AM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by five fresh fish at 9:46 AM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
In the first place, most of the pictures on that blog aren't even duck face! They're kissy-faces, and they're intended to make your face look thinner and your cheekbones more pronounced. Some of the kissy-faces are even clearly intended to be ironic or as sort of a pose.
posted by muddgirl at 9:49 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by muddgirl at 9:49 AM on December 16, 2009
It's like devoting a whole blog to the women who self-consciously do that "model pose" whenever their picture is taken. Or the men who tilt their head back and sort of look down their nose at the camera and frown.
posted by muddgirl at 9:51 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by muddgirl at 9:51 AM on December 16, 2009
I've been on MetaFilter for a while now. I know because my brain raised both Burhanistan's "patina of shit" question and cortex's "patina of shit is too real" defense before I read either of them. I'm self-beanplating.
posted by Bookhouse at 9:53 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by Bookhouse at 9:53 AM on December 16, 2009
The duckface one was to a mildly amusing spammy blog but was deleted because someone deserving might get their feelings hurt.
And here I thought I was the only one who got to decide who deserves to have their feelings hurt. Huhn.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:00 AM on December 16, 2009
And here I thought I was the only one who got to decide who deserves to have their feelings hurt. Huhn.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:00 AM on December 16, 2009
Man, I'm so glad someone else has noticed the "duckface" phenomenon. There was this one subway ad in NYC for sneakers or sunglasses or handbags or some shit, and it had this "duckface" girl on it, and it was EVERYWHERE. And every time I saw it I thought "god, that girl would be so hot if it wasn't for that dumb expression on her face."
The post should have stayed, as "duckface" should be discouraged at all opportunities. If those women keep that expression for too long, their faces will freeze in that position; obviously their mothers didn't teach them anything. The fact that the post was deleted is only proof that the mods at Metafilter have been co-opted by Big Duck.
Also, pointing and laughing? Totally okay. It's called public shaming, IT WORKS, it's an informal social control, it happens all the time on MetaTalk, and quite frankly, it beats prison, fines, caning, and the electric chair. The More You Know.
posted by Afroblanco at 10:01 AM on December 16, 2009 [6 favorites]
The post should have stayed, as "duckface" should be discouraged at all opportunities. If those women keep that expression for too long, their faces will freeze in that position; obviously their mothers didn't teach them anything. The fact that the post was deleted is only proof that the mods at Metafilter have been co-opted by Big Duck.
Also, pointing and laughing? Totally okay. It's called public shaming, IT WORKS, it's an informal social control, it happens all the time on MetaTalk, and quite frankly, it beats prison, fines, caning, and the electric chair. The More You Know.
posted by Afroblanco at 10:01 AM on December 16, 2009 [6 favorites]
It's tea-time here in England.
What are you on about?
posted by vacapinta at 10:02 AM on December 16, 2009 [19 favorites]
What are you on about?
posted by vacapinta at 10:02 AM on December 16, 2009 [19 favorites]
Afroblanco: "And every time I saw it I thought "god, that girl would be so hot if it wasn't for that dumb expression on her face.""
Exciting news! This means you are getting old.
posted by boo_radley at 10:06 AM on December 16, 2009 [5 favorites]
Exciting news! This means you are getting old.
posted by boo_radley at 10:06 AM on December 16, 2009 [5 favorites]
It's tea-time here in England.
Actually, I think you'll find England has two time zones. It's tea time in Sheffield, but in London they're still having their dinner.
(Oh, and I didn't like the upside down picture thread anyway. I thought it was too "selling your wares", but hey.)
posted by Sova at 10:08 AM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Actually, I think you'll find England has two time zones. It's tea time in Sheffield, but in London they're still having their dinner.
(Oh, and I didn't like the upside down picture thread anyway. I thought it was too "selling your wares", but hey.)
posted by Sova at 10:08 AM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Can somebody explain to me why one got the boot and the other didn't?
Better lighting.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:13 AM on December 16, 2009
Better lighting.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:13 AM on December 16, 2009
"Four flame outs" scans wrong - needs an extra syllable.
Four sock puppets
Yeah... No. You'd have to sing, "Fo-our sock puppettes," which is far more awkward and horrible than "Fo-our fla-ame outs."
"Six ads a-viral"? Really? Ugh. You are a bad person and I hate you forever.
Twelve bands a-sucking
Eleven trolls a-typing
Ten sheeple sleeping
Nine shady AskMes
Eight RAIDs a-melting
Seven quonsars fishing
Six Beese a-Joeing
FIVE MOD THREAD!!!!!
Four stomping boots
Three faces
Two HAMBURGER
And a banjo under a tree
posted by Sys Rq at 10:13 AM on December 16, 2009 [8 favorites]
Four sock puppets
Yeah... No. You'd have to sing, "Fo-our sock puppettes," which is far more awkward and horrible than "Fo-our fla-ame outs."
"Six ads a-viral"? Really? Ugh. You are a bad person and I hate you forever.
Twelve bands a-sucking
Eleven trolls a-typing
Ten sheeple sleeping
Nine shady AskMes
Eight RAIDs a-melting
Seven quonsars fishing
Six Beese a-Joeing
FIVE MOD THREAD!!!!!
Four stomping boots
Three faces
Two HAMBURGER
And a banjo under a tree
posted by Sys Rq at 10:13 AM on December 16, 2009 [8 favorites]
The Art versus Crap debate will never be resolved.
What? You must be clinically insane. This issue was settled in 1969, the year of my birth. Art: what I do. Crap: what others do. Suck it long and hard and often, important historical figures such as Albrecht Durer!
posted by Skot at 10:16 AM on December 16, 2009 [6 favorites]
What? You must be clinically insane. This issue was settled in 1969, the year of my birth. Art: what I do. Crap: what others do. Suck it long and hard and often, important historical figures such as Albrecht Durer!
posted by Skot at 10:16 AM on December 16, 2009 [6 favorites]
In the first place, most of the pictures on that blog aren't even duck face! They're kissy-faces, and they're intended to make your face look thinner and your cheekbones more pronounced. Some of the kissy-faces are even clearly intended to be ironic or as sort of a pose.
Yes exactly. I mean if you are going to mock people at least get it right.
posted by ob at 10:18 AM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Yes exactly. I mean if you are going to mock people at least get it right.
posted by ob at 10:18 AM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
In the first place, most of the pictures on that blog aren't even duck face! They're kissy-faces, and they're intended to make your face look thinner and your cheekbones more pronounced.
Aaah, so that explains their popularity on online dating sites!
not that I've ever, uh.......
posted by Afroblanco at 10:20 AM on December 16, 2009
Aaah, so that explains their popularity on online dating sites!
not that I've ever, uh.......
posted by Afroblanco at 10:20 AM on December 16, 2009
oooooooold.
posted by boo_radley at 10:22 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by boo_radley at 10:22 AM on December 16, 2009
Yeah, they couldn't be any more different.
Not even if one was of faces and the other one was of butts?
LOLbutts
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:24 AM on December 16, 2009
Not even if one was of faces and the other one was of butts?
LOLbutts
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:24 AM on December 16, 2009
It's tea-time here in England.
Surely you mean teah-tam-meh time?
posted by The Whelk at 10:28 AM on December 16, 2009 [4 favorites]
Surely you mean teah-tam-meh time?
posted by The Whelk at 10:28 AM on December 16, 2009 [4 favorites]
Please note: there is no definitive MeFi version of "The Twelve Days of Xmas". Each user will have their own interpretation, with emphasis placed on site genera based on their own particular tastes and proclivities.
Nope. Every user has their own interpretation because no one can remember the fucking lyrics. They only remember the FIVE MOD THREAD! part, which they will scream at the top of their lungs.
posted by daniel_charms at 10:32 AM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
Nope. Every user has their own interpretation because no one can remember the fucking lyrics. They only remember the FIVE MOD THREAD! part, which they will scream at the top of their lungs.
posted by daniel_charms at 10:32 AM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
Most people can remember the "mathowie gave to me" part, too.
posted by Sys Rq at 10:37 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by Sys Rq at 10:37 AM on December 16, 2009
"...people go berserk at that point, running in from other rooms.."
posted by The Whelk at 10:40 AM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by The Whelk at 10:40 AM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
Thank you for making this post so I can in turn share this quite apropos webcomic which made me laugh.
posted by Dr-Baa at 10:46 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by Dr-Baa at 10:46 AM on December 16, 2009
That duckface blog is terrible and I can't look away!
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 10:50 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 10:50 AM on December 16, 2009
Never heard 'duck face' (one word or two? hyphen?) before that post.
hums: Where did you get that {duck} expression on your face...
posted by fixedgear at 10:58 AM on December 16, 2009
hums: Where did you get that {duck} expression on your face...
posted by fixedgear at 10:58 AM on December 16, 2009
On googling, I stand corrected. "Duckface" is apparently some sort of cross betwen kissy-face and pouting? So not only does it make your cheekbones look sharp and your cheeks look skinny, it makes your lips look big and lush. Basically it's a porn face. So instead of mocking it, stop buying porn that features weird poses.
I feel the same way about people who mock women with "unnatural" breast implants. It started with wank-off mags, and now you're going to pretend you didn't get off on it?
posted by muddgirl at 11:05 AM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
I feel the same way about people who mock women with "unnatural" breast implants. It started with wank-off mags, and now you're going to pretend you didn't get off on it?
posted by muddgirl at 11:05 AM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
it rarely involves actual offal
My friends and I at the International Offal Appreciation Society demand that you retract this statement and clearly state that offal does not have a "patina of shittiness."
posted by nestor_makhno at 11:10 AM on December 16, 2009
My friends and I at the International Offal Appreciation Society demand that you retract this statement and clearly state that offal does not have a "patina of shittiness."
posted by nestor_makhno at 11:10 AM on December 16, 2009
what is the difference between food and rock's. both of them can go in your mouTH.
posted by Damn That Television at 11:23 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by Damn That Television at 11:23 AM on December 16, 2009
It started with wank-off mags, and now you're going to pretend you didn't get off on it?
I'm only publicly denying that I get off on duckface. One day when I'm running for congress, there will be a huge scandal involving my closet full of "PlayDuck" magazines.
Yeah, I think it's pretty safe to say that duckface is "MySpace angles" for the Facebook era.
posted by Afroblanco at 11:23 AM on December 16, 2009
I'm only publicly denying that I get off on duckface. One day when I'm running for congress, there will be a huge scandal involving my closet full of "PlayDuck" magazines.
Yeah, I think it's pretty safe to say that duckface is "MySpace angles" for the Facebook era.
posted by Afroblanco at 11:23 AM on December 16, 2009
I don't see the difference between the deleted duckface photos thread and the upside down photos thread.
Production values.
posted by Artw at 11:23 AM on December 16, 2009
Production values.
posted by Artw at 11:23 AM on December 16, 2009
Context is important.
posted by Crabby Appleton at 11:39 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by Crabby Appleton at 11:39 AM on December 16, 2009
There should be posters of famous politicians done in that popular mosaic style, only exclusively comprised of butts.
There are, you know. My boyfriend's company had a large poster of Rumsfeld made out of porn. Hardcore, XXXX porn. It was rather nasty.
posted by oneirodynia at 11:47 AM on December 16, 2009
There are, you know. My boyfriend's company had a large poster of Rumsfeld made out of porn. Hardcore, XXXX porn. It was rather nasty.
posted by oneirodynia at 11:47 AM on December 16, 2009
The best way to get rid of the shit but keep the patina is to soak the coins for a few years in olive oil. Wait, what?
posted by Elmore at 11:59 AM on December 16, 2009
posted by Elmore at 11:59 AM on December 16, 2009
My boyfriend's company had a large poster of Rumsfeld made out of porn. Hardcore, XXXX porn. It was rather nasty.
I'd say, but at least the porn images made up for it somewhat.
posted by Elmore at 12:03 PM on December 16, 2009 [5 favorites]
I'd say, but at least the porn images made up for it somewhat.
posted by Elmore at 12:03 PM on December 16, 2009 [5 favorites]
I thought it was called pouting, but "duck face" works.
posted by everichon at 12:09 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by everichon at 12:09 PM on December 16, 2009
FIVE MODS ENTER
FIVE MODS LEAVE
posted by shakespeherian at 12:24 PM on December 16, 2009 [4 favorites]
FIVE MODS LEAVE
posted by shakespeherian at 12:24 PM on December 16, 2009 [4 favorites]
Hardcore, XXXX porn.
The extra X let's you know its dirtier.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:27 PM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
The extra X let's you know its dirtier.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:27 PM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
The extra X let's you know its dirtier.
Which begs the question, what units/scale most effectively measure porn dirtiness? Beaufort, Richter, Scoville?
posted by ob at 12:34 PM on December 16, 2009
Which begs the question, what units/scale most effectively measure porn dirtiness? Beaufort, Richter, Scoville?
posted by ob at 12:34 PM on December 16, 2009
The shibboleth of a true New Yorker of my age is that s/he can tell you what the "extra e" is for. Channel J in da house!
posted by Admiral Haddock at 12:35 PM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by Admiral Haddock at 12:35 PM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
I'm thinking the sounds an ancient pencil-pushing bureaucrat would make during bouts of sex, perhaps we could call it the Rumsfeld scale:
Hrrm ---- Urgh ---- Grnn ---- Blargh
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:38 PM on December 16, 2009
Hrrm ---- Urgh ---- Grnn ---- Blargh
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:38 PM on December 16, 2009
flagged for incorrect use of 'begs the question.'
posted by fixedgear at 12:38 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by fixedgear at 12:38 PM on December 16, 2009
Which begs the question, what units/scale most effectively measure porn dirtiness? Beaufort, Richter, Scoville?
Gräfenbergs.
posted by Astro Zombie at 12:42 PM on December 16, 2009
Gräfenbergs.
posted by Astro Zombie at 12:42 PM on December 16, 2009
On the first day of Festivus
My true mod gave to me
A five minute window
Of editability.
posted by UbuRoivas at 12:46 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
My true mod gave to me
A five minute window
Of editability.
posted by UbuRoivas at 12:46 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
wait, i screwed up the meter there...lemme just go back and edit it - hey, gimme back my pony, asshole!
posted by UbuRoivas at 12:46 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by UbuRoivas at 12:46 PM on December 16, 2009
Noughties.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:47 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:47 PM on December 16, 2009
gimme back my pony, asshole!
This is one of the times when having a vivid imagination can really bite you...
posted by daniel_charms at 12:49 PM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
This is one of the times when having a vivid imagination can really bite you...
posted by daniel_charms at 12:49 PM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
Blazecock Pileon: The extra X let's you know its dirtier.
(annoying trivia nerd) That's actually why porn says XXX in the first place. When the MPAA created the X rating, they failed to trademark it the way they'd trademarked G and PG and R, and the porn industry jumped all over it and started labeling all their films varying degrees of X-rated. Pretty soon 'X-rated' came to mean 'porn' as far as anyone not in the MPAA was concerned, and thus they ditched the X rating and trademarked NC-17 to replace it.
For this reason, Midnight Cowboy will forever be the only X-rated film to win a Best Picture Oscar.
posted by shakespeherian at 12:51 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
(annoying trivia nerd) That's actually why porn says XXX in the first place. When the MPAA created the X rating, they failed to trademark it the way they'd trademarked G and PG and R, and the porn industry jumped all over it and started labeling all their films varying degrees of X-rated. Pretty soon 'X-rated' came to mean 'porn' as far as anyone not in the MPAA was concerned, and thus they ditched the X rating and trademarked NC-17 to replace it.
For this reason, Midnight Cowboy will forever be the only X-rated film to win a Best Picture Oscar.
posted by shakespeherian at 12:51 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Which begs the question, what units/scale most effectively measure porn dirtiness? Beaufort, Richter, Scoville?
Mohs?
posted by Skot at 12:51 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Mohs?
posted by Skot at 12:51 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
what units/scale most effectively measure porn dirtiness?
Rockwell.
posted by cairnish at 12:54 PM on December 16, 2009 [6 favorites]
Rockwell.
posted by cairnish at 12:54 PM on December 16, 2009 [6 favorites]
Just think: There is are lost XX film reels lying in a dusty can, somewhere in sands of porn history.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:55 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:55 PM on December 16, 2009
Which begs the question, what units/scale most effectively measure porn dirtiness? Beaufort, Richter, Scoville?
Bristols
Aaaaand we're back where we started...
posted by 1f2frfbf at 12:55 PM on December 16, 2009
Bristols
Aaaaand we're back where we started...
posted by 1f2frfbf at 12:55 PM on December 16, 2009
cairnish: "what units/scale most effectively measure porn dirtiness? Rockwell"
FTA:
"The Rockwell test determines the hardness by measuring the depth of penetration of an indenter under a large load compared to the penetration made by a preload."
QFT
posted by idiopath at 12:57 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
FTA:
"The Rockwell test determines the hardness by measuring the depth of penetration of an indenter under a large load compared to the penetration made by a preload."
QFT
posted by idiopath at 12:57 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
what units/scale most effectively measure porn dirtiness?
Rockwell.
*blink*
RESIST YOUNG WHELK! RESIST! TAME THE FORCES INSIDE YOU! MIND OVER MATTER! MIND OVER MATTER WHELK!
*blink*
Baby, you know I'm all Diamond Cone.
YOU FAILED ME, CHILD.
posted by The Whelk at 12:57 PM on December 16, 2009
Mohs?
Mohs
Ah, that would explain the immortal phrase: "Quick get the fluffer, he's approaching Orthoclase Feldspar. Soon he'll lose his Apatite!"
I'm sure we all remember where we were when we first heard that.
posted by ob at 1:03 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Mohs
Ah, that would explain the immortal phrase: "Quick get the fluffer, he's approaching Orthoclase Feldspar. Soon he'll lose his Apatite!"
I'm sure we all remember where we were when we first heard that.
posted by ob at 1:03 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Wow. Go to lunch with the boss and look what happens.
"Your question has already been answered, but I'm still curious, why did you start this thread? Are you pro-duckface or anti-upside down face?"
Neither one. I thought they were both equally interesting. My real problem is that I find myself increasingly unhappy with what feels like increasingly heavy-handed moderation. I disagree with many of the decisions about which posts have the patina of shitty. I've had this growing dissatisfaction over the last 18 months or so.
I'm not a special snowflake in this regard, and don't have anything particularly innovative to say about it. Metafilter has been a big part of my online life for a long time (even if my posting numbers are low), and it's weird for me to feel so out of step with a community that has been so influential to me.
posted by Irontom at 1:20 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
"Your question has already been answered, but I'm still curious, why did you start this thread? Are you pro-duckface or anti-upside down face?"
Neither one. I thought they were both equally interesting. My real problem is that I find myself increasingly unhappy with what feels like increasingly heavy-handed moderation. I disagree with many of the decisions about which posts have the patina of shitty. I've had this growing dissatisfaction over the last 18 months or so.
I'm not a special snowflake in this regard, and don't have anything particularly innovative to say about it. Metafilter has been a big part of my online life for a long time (even if my posting numbers are low), and it's weird for me to feel so out of step with a community that has been so influential to me.
posted by Irontom at 1:20 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
increasingly heavy-handed moderation
I don't think this is true. But if it were, well, the moderators are people and it's understandable if they, like lots of other internet users, are getting really sick of both Tumblr blogs that are unveiled attempts at ad-revenue-generation and blogs whose sole purpose is to make fun of, put down, and criticize other internet users. What value does the Duckface site provide beyond feeding your sense of moral superiority?
posted by muddgirl at 1:28 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
I don't think this is true. But if it were, well, the moderators are people and it's understandable if they, like lots of other internet users, are getting really sick of both Tumblr blogs that are unveiled attempts at ad-revenue-generation and blogs whose sole purpose is to make fun of, put down, and criticize other internet users. What value does the Duckface site provide beyond feeding your sense of moral superiority?
posted by muddgirl at 1:28 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Wow. If someone I knew ever made a face like that, I'd...i'd...have to slap it. I wouldn't be able to help it.
at the very least I would punch them in the arm
posted by davejay at 1:30 PM on December 16, 2009
at the very least I would punch them in the arm
posted by davejay at 1:30 PM on December 16, 2009
increasingly heavy-handed moderation
Every so often someone claims this. I really don't think that's the case.
posted by ob at 1:31 PM on December 16, 2009
Every so often someone claims this. I really don't think that's the case.
posted by ob at 1:31 PM on December 16, 2009
I actually think the moderation isn't heavy-handed enough. That's just me though.
posted by dead cousin ted at 1:36 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by dead cousin ted at 1:36 PM on December 16, 2009
I like my moderation like I like my women -- crazy and abusive.
posted by Astro Zombie at 1:39 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by Astro Zombie at 1:39 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
I like my moderation like I like my men -- invisible yet firm.
posted by The Whelk at 1:46 PM on December 16, 2009 [9 favorites]
posted by The Whelk at 1:46 PM on December 16, 2009 [9 favorites]
I like my women like my whiskey-- twelve years old and mixed up in coke.
posted by shakespeherian at 2:00 PM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by shakespeherian at 2:00 PM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
My sense of moral superiority? Just because I look at a website and find the pictures on it fascinating doesn't mean that I agree with or endorse anything they have to say about said pictures.
I had never even heard of duckface before this morning, and I thought it was an interesting concept. Not from a "Ha!Ha! Stupid fuckers" point of view, but more like "I had no idea this was a thing common enough to bother people - weird!". One of the great things about Metafilter has been the hundreds (if not thousands) of things that it has exposed me to over the years. Stuff I would never encountered on my own, like duckface and upside down portraiture.
Every so often someone claims this. I really don't think that's the case.
Reasonable people can disagree about these things. Like I said - I find myself in a weird mental space over this. I think I'm going to kill the script that allows me to see deleted threads and see if it helps.
posted by Irontom at 2:04 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
I had never even heard of duckface before this morning, and I thought it was an interesting concept. Not from a "Ha!Ha! Stupid fuckers" point of view, but more like "I had no idea this was a thing common enough to bother people - weird!". One of the great things about Metafilter has been the hundreds (if not thousands) of things that it has exposed me to over the years. Stuff I would never encountered on my own, like duckface and upside down portraiture.
Every so often someone claims this. I really don't think that's the case.
Reasonable people can disagree about these things. Like I said - I find myself in a weird mental space over this. I think I'm going to kill the script that allows me to see deleted threads and see if it helps.
posted by Irontom at 2:04 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
What value does the Duckface site provide beyond feeding your sense of moral superiority?
Oh, if only my sense of moral superiority were so easy to feed. I will have you know that duckface was barely a moral superiority snack; not even a full-on appetizer.
It would be more accurate to say that duckface was one of those delicious little bonbons they serve you between courses when you order the tasting menu at the moral superiority restaurant.
posted by Afroblanco at 2:06 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Oh, if only my sense of moral superiority were so easy to feed. I will have you know that duckface was barely a moral superiority snack; not even a full-on appetizer.
It would be more accurate to say that duckface was one of those delicious little bonbons they serve you between courses when you order the tasting menu at the moral superiority restaurant.
posted by Afroblanco at 2:06 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
An amusant bouche, if you will.
posted by Admiral Haddock at 2:07 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by Admiral Haddock at 2:07 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
when you order the tasting menu at the moral superiority restaurant.
They don't serve Humble Pie, but you can get a ripping I'm So Fucking Fantastic Flan.
posted by The Whelk at 2:08 PM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
They don't serve Humble Pie, but you can get a ripping I'm So Fucking Fantastic Flan.
posted by The Whelk at 2:08 PM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
>>Yeah, they couldn't be any more different.
>Not even if one was of faces and the other one was of butts?
How about a blog of MySpace DuckButt poses?
posted by timeistight at 2:08 PM on December 16, 2009
>Not even if one was of faces and the other one was of butts?
How about a blog of MySpace DuckButt poses?
posted by timeistight at 2:08 PM on December 16, 2009
Pentamod singularity achieved in less than two hours! I guess that makes it the third fastest such singularity?
posted by cobwebberies at 2:08 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by cobwebberies at 2:08 PM on December 16, 2009
I like my women like I like my wine - locked in a cellar until they've properly matured.
am i doing this right?
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:09 PM on December 16, 2009
am i doing this right?
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:09 PM on December 16, 2009
Amusante bouche, ack. Desolé.
posted by Admiral Haddock at 2:10 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by Admiral Haddock at 2:10 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
How about a blog of MySpace DuckButt poses?
Or, you know, the other side
posted by The Whelk at 2:10 PM on December 16, 2009
Or, you know, the other side
posted by The Whelk at 2:10 PM on December 16, 2009
Heavy-handed moderator candidate #1
I have it on good authority that that glove is made from aluminium.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:11 PM on December 16, 2009
I have it on good authority that that glove is made from aluminium.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:11 PM on December 16, 2009
Stop it with the "I like my women like..." jokes, they're crappy.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 2:12 PM on December 16, 2009 [5 favorites]
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 2:12 PM on December 16, 2009 [5 favorites]
I like my men unlike my women.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:14 PM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:14 PM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
I like my moderators to be constructed from reactor-grade pyrolytic carbon.
posted by Artw at 2:15 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by Artw at 2:15 PM on December 16, 2009
I like my moderators to be constructed from reactor-grade pyrolytic carbon.
Fine. More of pb's silicon positronic network for us then.
posted by The Whelk at 2:16 PM on December 16, 2009
Fine. More of pb's silicon positronic network for us then.
posted by The Whelk at 2:16 PM on December 16, 2009
So, anyway, when is the secret mod exchange happening again?
posted by Artw at 2:16 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by Artw at 2:16 PM on December 16, 2009
is that when we secretly exchange mods ala Foldger's Crystals or when he exchange the secret mods?
posted by The Whelk at 2:18 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by The Whelk at 2:18 PM on December 16, 2009
I'll take that as a "no".
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:19 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:19 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
According to wikipedia the most important thing about moderators is that they be not have any neutron-absorbing impurities such as boron. So basically this would be the car the worst mod in the world would drive. Keep an eye on the parking lots.
posted by Artw at 2:21 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by Artw at 2:21 PM on December 16, 2009
is that when we secretly exchange mods ala Foldger's Crystals or when he exchange the secret mods?
It's to prove a point!
No, no, it's the place on the secret base where you go to stock up on your mods with your military discount.
posted by Sidhedevil at 2:22 PM on December 16, 2009
It's to prove a point!
No, no, it's the place on the secret base where you go to stock up on your mods with your military discount.
posted by Sidhedevil at 2:22 PM on December 16, 2009
I thought it was 'amuse bouche?'
posted by fixedgear at 2:24 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by fixedgear at 2:24 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
The Whelk: is that when we secretly exchange mods ala Foldger's Crystals or when he exchange the secret mods
Stop! You're both right!
posted by shakespeherian at 2:25 PM on December 16, 2009
Stop! You're both right!
posted by shakespeherian at 2:25 PM on December 16, 2009
Reasonable people can disagree about these things. Like I said - I find myself in a weird mental space over this. I think I'm going to kill the script that allows me to see deleted threads and see if it helps.
Nah, don't do that. Just skip right over to the deleted threads blog. The best posts always end up there.
Woah, they even have comments enabled! If I had known that when Michael Jackson died I would have made so many bad jokes that the feds would have suspected me of his murder.
posted by bunnytricks at 2:26 PM on December 16, 2009
Nah, don't do that. Just skip right over to the deleted threads blog. The best posts always end up there.
Woah, they even have comments enabled! If I had known that when Michael Jackson died I would have made so many bad jokes that the feds would have suspected me of his murder.
posted by bunnytricks at 2:26 PM on December 16, 2009
I thought it was 'amuse bouche?'
Mais oui, but the "amusante bouche" is the visage de canards. Assez drôle, n'est ce pas?
posted by Admiral Haddock at 2:28 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Mais oui, but the "amusante bouche" is the visage de canards. Assez drôle, n'est ce pas?
posted by Admiral Haddock at 2:28 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
neutron-absorbing impurities
Fermi l'amuse bouche.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:29 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Fermi l'amuse bouche.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:29 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Like I said - I find myself in a weird mental space over this.
I think for a lot of longtime users, especially ones that aren't too keen on being in a moderated space, there have been some changes that might be noticeable. I'm talking like the last few years, not like the last few months. As the site has gotten larger and we've had more and more new users, we've had to codify some things that were more understood before. So I think while AskMe moderation has remained pretty much the same, MeFi moderation has changed a little and we've been doing some moderation in MeTa where we pretty much hadn't before.
If I had to point to the differences, I'd say
- savaging people who espouse unpopular opinions [and the torches and pitchforks routine] not really okay in MeTa anymore. Fighting and arguing, still okay; wishing someone gets assassinated or raped in prison, not okay.
- early lulzy threadshitting by the Usual Suspects sometimes gets deleted in MeFi where it didn't before
- casual racism and sexism gets a harder look by both mods and the community [which is cyclical, of course] and is less likely to stay around
- pile-ons of the "everyone vs one user" type are less okay now than they used to be and we'll more closely moderate that sort of thing in MeFi and in MeTa
Someone can look at the stats but I suspect that the percentage of MeFi posts that get deleted [ignoring SEO spammers which are total non-judgement call situations] is actually lower than a year or two ago. There are just way more posts. That said, someone with access to the infodump should check.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 2:34 PM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
I think for a lot of longtime users, especially ones that aren't too keen on being in a moderated space, there have been some changes that might be noticeable. I'm talking like the last few years, not like the last few months. As the site has gotten larger and we've had more and more new users, we've had to codify some things that were more understood before. So I think while AskMe moderation has remained pretty much the same, MeFi moderation has changed a little and we've been doing some moderation in MeTa where we pretty much hadn't before.
If I had to point to the differences, I'd say
- savaging people who espouse unpopular opinions [and the torches and pitchforks routine] not really okay in MeTa anymore. Fighting and arguing, still okay; wishing someone gets assassinated or raped in prison, not okay.
- early lulzy threadshitting by the Usual Suspects sometimes gets deleted in MeFi where it didn't before
- casual racism and sexism gets a harder look by both mods and the community [which is cyclical, of course] and is less likely to stay around
- pile-ons of the "everyone vs one user" type are less okay now than they used to be and we'll more closely moderate that sort of thing in MeFi and in MeTa
Someone can look at the stats but I suspect that the percentage of MeFi posts that get deleted [ignoring SEO spammers which are total non-judgement call situations] is actually lower than a year or two ago. There are just way more posts. That said, someone with access to the infodump should check.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 2:34 PM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
casual racism and sexism gets a harder look
Yeah, sorry about the crappy cellar joke before - it's an Austrian thing.
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:41 PM on December 16, 2009
Yeah, sorry about the crappy cellar joke before - it's an Austrian thing.
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:41 PM on December 16, 2009
Mais oui, but the "amusante bouche" is the visage de canards. Assez drôle, n'est ce pas?
In Soviet France, bouche amuses you!
posted by Sys Rq at 2:46 PM on December 16, 2009
In Soviet France, bouche amuses you!
posted by Sys Rq at 2:46 PM on December 16, 2009
Admiral Haddock: “Mais oui, but the "amusante bouche"...”
Wasn't "L'Amusante Bouche" the French version of that English TV comedy series a few years ago?
posted by koeselitz at 3:13 PM on December 16, 2009
Wasn't "L'Amusante Bouche" the French version of that English TV comedy series a few years ago?
posted by koeselitz at 3:13 PM on December 16, 2009
I like my moderators like my hangovers - always present, but never too severe.
posted by Elmore at 3:18 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by Elmore at 3:18 PM on December 16, 2009
Fermi l'amuse bouche.
Oh, so now we're on to physics, are we? Show off.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 3:19 PM on December 16, 2009
Oh, so now we're on to physics, are we? Show off.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 3:19 PM on December 16, 2009
Amuse Douche?
posted by bzbb at 3:31 PM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by bzbb at 3:31 PM on December 16, 2009 [2 favorites]
There should be posters of famous politicians done in that popular mosaic style, only exclusively comprised of butts.
Burhanistan, if you were a faithful reader of blort.meepzorp, you would know that such a thing exists and that it was posted in 2003. It's not exactly butts, but a mosaic of butt parts.
posted by madamjujujive at 3:43 PM on December 16, 2009
Burhanistan, if you were a faithful reader of blort.meepzorp, you would know that such a thing exists and that it was posted in 2003. It's not exactly butts, but a mosaic of butt parts.
posted by madamjujujive at 3:43 PM on December 16, 2009
Basically it's a porn face.
Not really. It's a faux-sexy look, sure, but it's not really a staple of adult-films. It's more like 13 year olds pretending to be glamorous models or whatever, but soon took on a life of its own when older teens and adults started to do it on Myspace. The guido community added the innovation of men doing it too. Along with the wierd angles, it seems to be trying to make every sad bathroom self-portrait to appear as if was taken on a hyperkenetic dance floor.
I'm worried that younger kids are going to just do it automatically in every picture, because they'll just think that is the "picture face".
posted by spaltavian at 3:55 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Not really. It's a faux-sexy look, sure, but it's not really a staple of adult-films. It's more like 13 year olds pretending to be glamorous models or whatever, but soon took on a life of its own when older teens and adults started to do it on Myspace. The guido community added the innovation of men doing it too. Along with the wierd angles, it seems to be trying to make every sad bathroom self-portrait to appear as if was taken on a hyperkenetic dance floor.
I'm worried that younger kids are going to just do it automatically in every picture, because they'll just think that is the "picture face".
posted by spaltavian at 3:55 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
I blame duckfacebook for the spread of this awful pout meme, and to a lesser extent myduckface.
posted by Elmore at 4:01 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by Elmore at 4:01 PM on December 16, 2009
I'm worried that younger kids are going to just do it automatically in every picture, because they'll just think that is the "picture face".
But then somebody will think "Hey, what if I take a photo of myself just, y'know, smiling or looking kinda sultry, without pursing my lips like I've just sucked on a lemon from Soury McSour's Sour Lemon Farm...?"
And the other kids will go "Wow, check out this hot photo!" and things will turn full circle, until...
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:05 PM on December 16, 2009
But then somebody will think "Hey, what if I take a photo of myself just, y'know, smiling or looking kinda sultry, without pursing my lips like I've just sucked on a lemon from Soury McSour's Sour Lemon Farm...?"
And the other kids will go "Wow, check out this hot photo!" and things will turn full circle, until...
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:05 PM on December 16, 2009
I got drunk with a MeFite last night after work. I left him in the company of a rather demonstratrative gay barfly buddy of mine. I haven't seen either of them since.
posted by jonmc at 5:16 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by jonmc at 5:16 PM on December 16, 2009
Read that as "demonstrative gay barfy buddy" and all I could think was, man, sexual politics are weird.
posted by cortex (staff) at 5:21 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by cortex (staff) at 5:21 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Also, as far as I'm concerned the duckface thing is half-drunk people mugging for the camera who can't think of anything else to do, which is ultimately harmless. The antiduckface people are people who devote an awful lot of time and energy to making fun of half-drunk people mugging for the camera who can't think of anything else to do, which is ultimately ...kind of demented and sad, actually.
posted by jonmc at 5:28 PM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by jonmc at 5:28 PM on December 16, 2009 [3 favorites]
Also, as far as I'm concerned the duckface thing is half-drunk people mugging for the camera who can't think of anything else to do, which is ultimately harmless. The antiduckface people are people who devote an awful lot of time and energy to making fun of half-drunk people mugging for the camera who can't think of anything else to do, which is ultimately ...kind of demented and sad, actually.
And the people making fun of the people making fun of...
posted by Sys Rq at 5:33 PM on December 16, 2009
And the people making fun of the people making fun of...
posted by Sys Rq at 5:33 PM on December 16, 2009
You know, I've never thought of myself as 'antiduckface' before, but now that my social movement has a name, I'm prepared to own it.
I. AM. ANTIDUCKFACE.
posted by Afroblanco at 5:39 PM on December 16, 2009
I. AM. ANTIDUCKFACE.
posted by Afroblanco at 5:39 PM on December 16, 2009
I thought the duckface one was way better. Fuckface duckface.
posted by unSane at 6:25 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by unSane at 6:25 PM on December 16, 2009
Call me MISTER Antiduckface.
posted by shakespeherian at 6:27 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by shakespeherian at 6:27 PM on December 16, 2009
I. AM. ANTIDUCKFACE.
Aww, how could anyone be anti this?
posted by Atom Eyes at 6:29 PM on December 16, 2009
Aww, how could anyone be anti this?
posted by Atom Eyes at 6:29 PM on December 16, 2009
Several years ago I noticed that Paris Hilton and Donald Trump always had the exact same look on their faces when photographed-- head tilted down, half-closed eyes, pouty mouth--it made them look eerily similar. I think that was the beginning of the duckface movement.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:17 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:17 PM on December 16, 2009
Never heard 'duck face' (one word or two? hyphen?) before that post.
Me neither. But in my family, we call it "squid face".
posted by DarkForest at 8:48 PM on December 16, 2009
Me neither. But in my family, we call it "squid face".
posted by DarkForest at 8:48 PM on December 16, 2009
Someone can look at the stats but I suspect that the percentage of MeFi posts that get deleted [ignoring SEO spammers which are total non-judgement call situations] is actually lower than a year or two ago. There are just way more posts. That said, someone with access to the infodump should check.
Here's how the 'deleted' flags in the Infodump look, by year:
Disclaimers: I don't know if very near the end of 2001 is when deleted posts started being marked as such, and not actually deleted from the database, but I'm guessing so. I also don't know any way to tell which are SEO spammer posts.
posted by FishBike at 8:54 PM on December 16, 2009
Here's how the 'deleted' flags in the Infodump look, by year:
1999: 0.00% (0 of 420 posts)
2000: 0.00% (0 of 4410 posts)
2001: 0.01% (1 of 7911 posts)
2002: 6.44% (583 of 9054 posts)
2003: 5.08% (400 of 7878 posts)
2004: 4.29% (333 of 7771 posts)
2005: 7.13% (690 of 9683 posts)
2006: 9.46% (892 of 9426 posts)
2007: 10.06% (1049 of 10429 posts)
2008: 11.28% (1134 of 10053 posts)
2009: 10.22% (978 of 9570 posts)
Disclaimers: I don't know if very near the end of 2001 is when deleted posts started being marked as such, and not actually deleted from the database, but I'm guessing so. I also don't know any way to tell which are SEO spammer posts.
posted by FishBike at 8:54 PM on December 16, 2009
Secret Life of Gravy: "Several years ago I noticed that Paris Hilton and Donald Trump always had the exact same look on their faces when photographed-- head tilted down, half-closed eyes, pouty mouth--it made them look eerily similar."
Someone, I think William S. Burroughs, said you could tell the alien invaders amongst us because they have not perfected the art of appearing human enough to vary appearance at will. Unlike a real human, an alien pretending to be human will look the same in every photo.
posted by idiopath at 8:57 PM on December 16, 2009
Someone, I think William S. Burroughs, said you could tell the alien invaders amongst us because they have not perfected the art of appearing human enough to vary appearance at will. Unlike a real human, an alien pretending to be human will look the same in every photo.
posted by idiopath at 8:57 PM on December 16, 2009
Unlike a real human, an alien pretending to be human will look the same in every photo.
Psst! Guys, they're on to us! Everyone back to Thalas!
posted by The Whelk at 9:02 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Psst! Guys, they're on to us! Everyone back to Thalas!
posted by The Whelk at 9:02 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
I think you'd have too look at the actual deletion reasons to be sure, and classify double/spammer/notappropriateformefi by hand.
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 9:05 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 9:05 PM on December 16, 2009
I don't know that there's any good way to automatically sift deletions, other than autoidentifying a lot of double-post deletions based on either keywords (previously, recently, double) or the presence of a link to an existing thread.
You could probably make reasonably quick work of it manually just by checking through a distilled list of deletion reasons, though. For "several thousand entries" values of "quick".
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:07 PM on December 16, 2009
You could probably make reasonably quick work of it manually just by checking through a distilled list of deletion reasons, though. For "several thousand entries" values of "quick".
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:07 PM on December 16, 2009
If you choose to only look at q3 of 2007, 2008 and 2009, that's just 868 entries. I think quarters would be reprentative; please just tell me if you mods decided to change your policy somewhere between july 1st and september 30 of this year; I'd like (tomorrow night) to try and capture whatever difference in deletions the change in policy has brought.
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 9:24 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 9:24 PM on December 16, 2009
I don't know that there's any good way to automatically sift deletions, other than autoidentifying a lot of double-post deletions based on either keywords (previously, recently, double) or the presence of a link to an existing thread.
Having a look through the various ways the freeform deletion reason field has been used, I didn't see any good way to automate this to a significant extent.1
You could probably make reasonably quick work of it manually just by checking through a distilled list of deletion reasons, though. For "several thousand entries" values of "quick".
They don't appear to distill all that well, either.2 Almost all deletion reasons are unique. Some of them would probably require visiting the deleted post, because I'm not sure what a deletion reason of "heh." means, for instance.
So yeah, just grinding through a bunch to classify them manually is probably the best way. Monday, stony Monday's idea to just look at a sample instead of the whole list is good.
1. translation: I'm not smart enough to figure out a good way to do this.
2. see footnote 1.
posted by FishBike at 9:37 PM on December 16, 2009
Having a look through the various ways the freeform deletion reason field has been used, I didn't see any good way to automate this to a significant extent.1
You could probably make reasonably quick work of it manually just by checking through a distilled list of deletion reasons, though. For "several thousand entries" values of "quick".
They don't appear to distill all that well, either.2 Almost all deletion reasons are unique. Some of them would probably require visiting the deleted post, because I'm not sure what a deletion reason of "heh." means, for instance.
So yeah, just grinding through a bunch to classify them manually is probably the best way. Monday, stony Monday's idea to just look at a sample instead of the whole list is good.
1. translation: I'm not smart enough to figure out a good way to do this.
2. see footnote 1.
posted by FishBike at 9:37 PM on December 16, 2009
There are a few deletion reasons we use often that could maybe be ignored as "not requiring any mod judgment"
- self-link, banned [some combination of those words usually means SEO spammer type]
- links in main post changed to example.com [that ALWAYS means an SEO spammer]
- posted previously [double post]
- double [same]
cortex uses more amusing deletion reasons for doubles, but basically any reason for deletion that has HTML in it is likely either a double or basically saying "hey we're talking about this in another thread right now" which would also mean less mod-discretion. Given that we have two more weeks left in 2009, your numbers make it look like there may be a teeny decline in deletions, but not much really. I wonder if that's the same if we remove SEO spammers and/or doubles?
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:25 PM on December 16, 2009
- self-link, banned [some combination of those words usually means SEO spammer type]
- links in main post changed to example.com [that ALWAYS means an SEO spammer]
- posted previously [double post]
- double [same]
cortex uses more amusing deletion reasons for doubles, but basically any reason for deletion that has HTML in it is likely either a double or basically saying "hey we're talking about this in another thread right now" which would also mean less mod-discretion. Given that we have two more weeks left in 2009, your numbers make it look like there may be a teeny decline in deletions, but not much really. I wonder if that's the same if we remove SEO spammers and/or doubles?
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:25 PM on December 16, 2009
They don't appear to distill all that well, either.
Ah, I just meant "filter out a list of only deleted threads, and plow through those", nothing fancier than that. I think it'd require reading n = n deletion reasons and coding/tallying manually based on the content. To some extent I'm assuming here that a non-mod reader would be able to do this as quickly as a mod, which may be unrealistic. I could probably give it a shot myself at some point.
I think quarters would be reprentative; please just tell me if you mods decided to change your policy somewhere between july 1st and september 30 of this year
Quarterly isn't a bad idea, yeah, and q3 is better than q4 probably since the (perceived, not really formally tested) Year-End Craziness is avoided that way. You're going to see some '08 effects in terms of election season, though.
We haven't made any formal or abrupt changes to deletion policy, for what it's worth; the stuff to which Jessamyn is referring is more slow-burn shifts in where we draw the line on some things, and affects comments as much as anything, so if there are changes in how we deal with post deletions it'll be more of an effect over a series of years than anything. I think it'd be hard to separate that out from the general slow shift in volume and userbase over the same timeframe.
Of all the unadjusted-for effects in play, I'd guess me coming on board in early 2007 may have introduced a change just because there was another set of hands on the wheel (hence some change in how things were dealt with, though I was pretty cautiously taking guidance from Matt and Jess initially) and because there was more coverage period (which might have lead to prompter, and possibly more, deletions in some cases, though FishBike's numbers don't suggest really significant growth in deletion rate from 2006 to 2009, say).
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:29 PM on December 16, 2009
Ah, I just meant "filter out a list of only deleted threads, and plow through those", nothing fancier than that. I think it'd require reading n = n deletion reasons and coding/tallying manually based on the content. To some extent I'm assuming here that a non-mod reader would be able to do this as quickly as a mod, which may be unrealistic. I could probably give it a shot myself at some point.
I think quarters would be reprentative; please just tell me if you mods decided to change your policy somewhere between july 1st and september 30 of this year
Quarterly isn't a bad idea, yeah, and q3 is better than q4 probably since the (perceived, not really formally tested) Year-End Craziness is avoided that way. You're going to see some '08 effects in terms of election season, though.
We haven't made any formal or abrupt changes to deletion policy, for what it's worth; the stuff to which Jessamyn is referring is more slow-burn shifts in where we draw the line on some things, and affects comments as much as anything, so if there are changes in how we deal with post deletions it'll be more of an effect over a series of years than anything. I think it'd be hard to separate that out from the general slow shift in volume and userbase over the same timeframe.
Of all the unadjusted-for effects in play, I'd guess me coming on board in early 2007 may have introduced a change just because there was another set of hands on the wheel (hence some change in how things were dealt with, though I was pretty cautiously taking guidance from Matt and Jess initially) and because there was more coverage period (which might have lead to prompter, and possibly more, deletions in some cases, though FishBike's numbers don't suggest really significant growth in deletion rate from 2006 to 2009, say).
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:29 PM on December 16, 2009
cortex uses more amusing deletion reasons for doubles, but basically any reason for deletion that has HTML in it is likely either a double or basically saying "hey we're talking about this in another thread right now" which would also mean less mod-discretion.
Yeah. Contains-link-to-mefi: probable double. Contains-link-to-metatalk: probable contentious/misplaced/pre-empted thing, possibly also a double or updatefilter as well.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:30 PM on December 16, 2009
Yeah. Contains-link-to-mefi: probable double. Contains-link-to-metatalk: probable contentious/misplaced/pre-empted thing, possibly also a double or updatefilter as well.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:30 PM on December 16, 2009
Yeah the only real post-type reasoning that has shifted in the past 12 months is "first obit post doesn't always stay" but we're still deleting all but one obit post, so I don't think that really affects much.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:33 PM on December 16, 2009
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:33 PM on December 16, 2009
Yeah we say "yeah" a lot.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:34 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:34 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
Yeah. Yeah, you do.
You should say "Dig it!" instead.
posted by Crabby Appleton at 10:49 PM on December 16, 2009
You should say "Dig it!" instead.
posted by Crabby Appleton at 10:49 PM on December 16, 2009
Ah, I just meant "filter out a list of only deleted threads, and plow through those", nothing fancier than that. I think it'd require reading n = n deletion reasons and coding/tallying manually based on the content. To some extent I'm assuming here that a non-mod reader would be able to do this as quickly as a mod, which may be unrealistic. I could probably give it a shot myself at some point.
Just to get some idea of the scale of the work, I pulled up a list of all the unique deletion reasons. There are 4974 of them, and that's just for the front page (which is what I've been assuming we are talking about right now).
There might be some middle ground where certain key words pretty reliably identify the deletion category, like "self-link" (197 of those) and "previously" (579). I don't think we can find posts referring to example.com1 using the Infodump. Perhaps one-by-one analysis could be done on only the leftovers after a good set of keyword matches. I have to admit I'm too lazy2 to go through them all one at a time, but yeah3, I don't see any particular reason why it helps to be a mod to do that.
1: It took me quite a while to catch on to the example.com thing. I kept looking at deleted posts and thinking, what the hell is with these example.com guys, and why don't they just filter out posts linking to them before they even hit the front page?
2: That peculiar kind of lazy that a lot of computer folks have. I'll gladly spend a day programming a computer to do something that would have taken me an hour to do manually.
3: "Yeah" is to MetaTalk like "So" is to Ask MetaFilter.
posted by FishBike at 10:51 PM on December 16, 2009
Just to get some idea of the scale of the work, I pulled up a list of all the unique deletion reasons. There are 4974 of them, and that's just for the front page (which is what I've been assuming we are talking about right now).
There might be some middle ground where certain key words pretty reliably identify the deletion category, like "self-link" (197 of those) and "previously" (579). I don't think we can find posts referring to example.com1 using the Infodump. Perhaps one-by-one analysis could be done on only the leftovers after a good set of keyword matches. I have to admit I'm too lazy2 to go through them all one at a time, but yeah3, I don't see any particular reason why it helps to be a mod to do that.
1: It took me quite a while to catch on to the example.com thing. I kept looking at deleted posts and thinking, what the hell is with these example.com guys, and why don't they just filter out posts linking to them before they even hit the front page?
2: That peculiar kind of lazy that a lot of computer folks have. I'll gladly spend a day programming a computer to do something that would have taken me an hour to do manually.
3: "Yeah" is to MetaTalk like "So" is to Ask MetaFilter.
posted by FishBike at 10:51 PM on December 16, 2009
"Ergo, the shittiness is the patina of shit? This needs further reduction and clarification."
Try adding red wine and simmering.
Sorry, I'm late. Wha'd I miss?
posted by klangklangston at 10:54 PM on December 16, 2009
Try adding red wine and simmering.
Sorry, I'm late. Wha'd I miss?
posted by klangklangston at 10:54 PM on December 16, 2009
FishBike, what happens if you have a recursive1 footnote?
1: See recursion2
2: See recursion3
3: See recursion4
4: See recursion5
5: See recursion6
6: See recursion7
7: See recursion8
8: See recursion9
posted by knave at 11:39 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
1: See recursion2
2: See recursion3
3: See recursion4
4: See recursion5
5: See recursion6
6: See recursion7
7: See recursion8
8: See recursion9
posted by knave at 11:39 PM on December 16, 2009 [1 favorite]
I prefer to misuse contractions. That's the kind of guy I'm.
posted by fleacircus at 5:10 AM on December 17, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by fleacircus at 5:10 AM on December 17, 2009 [1 favorite]
knave: "FishBike, what happens if you have a recursive footnote?"
That's not recursion, it's just retarded1. Also, it throws a NoSuchFootnoteException at footnote 8.
1: I apologize for the retarded1 use of that word.
posted by Plutor at 5:17 AM on December 17, 2009 [2 favorites]
That's not recursion, it's just retarded1. Also, it throws a NoSuchFootnoteException at footnote 8.
1: I apologize for the retarded1 use of that word.
posted by Plutor at 5:17 AM on December 17, 2009 [2 favorites]
I suppose I was acting out the recursion through myself, as a (retarded) interpreter. And I almost wrote "stack overflow" at the end, but I thought that was obvious. </plate_of_beans>
posted by knave at 5:24 AM on December 17, 2009
posted by knave at 5:24 AM on December 17, 2009
"That's not recursion, it's just retarded"
He is clearly optimizing for speed at a cost to vertical space, by unrolling his loop. Since most readers will stop at by the 8th repetition or so, he has tailored his code for the most pervasive case.
posted by idiopath at 5:30 AM on December 17, 2009
He is clearly optimizing for speed at a cost to vertical space, by unrolling his loop. Since most readers will stop at by the 8th repetition or so, he has tailored his code for the most pervasive case.
posted by idiopath at 5:30 AM on December 17, 2009
That tumblr shit smacks of "Yo I made this tumblr shit with a bunch of chicks I find hott but instead of talking about how I'd bang em I'ma make fun of their poses like I WOULDN'T bang em yeah see what I did there?"
(Henceforth whenever I say "tumblr" I am following it with "shit," because it just sounds so fitting. Yeah.)
posted by Metroid Baby at 5:33 AM on December 17, 2009
(Henceforth whenever I say "tumblr" I am following it with "shit," because it just sounds so fitting. Yeah.)
posted by Metroid Baby at 5:33 AM on December 17, 2009
Yeth
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:01 AM on December 17, 2009
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:01 AM on December 17, 2009
Duck has to be one of the greatest things to eat in the world. I can eat it any way it's prepared. My fav is over risotto with a fig reduction sauce... Dear God. Wait a minute this thread isn't about cooking Duck at all! I demand my money back.
posted by Mastercheddaar at 7:32 AM on December 17, 2009
posted by Mastercheddaar at 7:32 AM on December 17, 2009
Ducks are notorious rapists. Especially mallards.
posted by haveanicesummer at 7:42 AM on December 17, 2009
posted by haveanicesummer at 7:42 AM on December 17, 2009
One day, someone's gonna post a "Why was this post deleted when this similar post wasn't?" metatalk thread, the mod response is going to be "Yeah - You're right.", and they're going to delete it.
And as much as that's going to make the metatalk poster feel like The God Who Spoiled It For The Others, it's not going to go down well with the happy people who are enjoying a thread that might have been otherwise missed.
There's this thing you can do with kids (try this at home - It's awesome), where you give them the choice between having 1 sweet & their friend/sibling having two sweets or neither child having any sweet. Pretty much every time, kid's would rather go without than have this little bit of unfairness in the world. It's a bizarre thing.
I believe it's what people are doing when they say - "You deleted this post I like, so why don't you delete this other post that I'd also like if I wasn't so miffed at the aforementioned deletion."
My point is, that you should judge posts individually, and stop comparing them to other posts that may have been treated differently. The world is random and imperfect and these things happen.
You may, at this point of my poorly thought out comment, be telling yourself that this isn't the point, and you're trying to solidify the rules of the site. Don't believe your brain here. It's lying to you. Really.
Anyhoos - I'll probably read everyone elses comments now - See if I'm actually repeating a theme that's already something that's been fully talked over.
posted by seanyboy at 8:16 AM on December 17, 2009
And as much as that's going to make the metatalk poster feel like The God Who Spoiled It For The Others, it's not going to go down well with the happy people who are enjoying a thread that might have been otherwise missed.
There's this thing you can do with kids (try this at home - It's awesome), where you give them the choice between having 1 sweet & their friend/sibling having two sweets or neither child having any sweet. Pretty much every time, kid's would rather go without than have this little bit of unfairness in the world. It's a bizarre thing.
I believe it's what people are doing when they say - "You deleted this post I like, so why don't you delete this other post that I'd also like if I wasn't so miffed at the aforementioned deletion."
My point is, that you should judge posts individually, and stop comparing them to other posts that may have been treated differently. The world is random and imperfect and these things happen.
You may, at this point of my poorly thought out comment, be telling yourself that this isn't the point, and you're trying to solidify the rules of the site. Don't believe your brain here. It's lying to you. Really.
Anyhoos - I'll probably read everyone elses comments now - See if I'm actually repeating a theme that's already something that's been fully talked over.
posted by seanyboy at 8:16 AM on December 17, 2009
It's intriguing* to note that it's perfectly OK to post blogs about cats that look like Hitler, but not people that look like ducks. Hitler cats can't actually do much about their appearance and lack suitable appendages for typing their displeasure at being linked to one of the most villainous characters in human history, whereas these 'duckfaces' are publicly displaying their duckery elsewhere and can have their photos removed upon request. Won't someone think of the Hitler cats?**
*You know, when you think about it, I'm just being contrary for chuckles and it's not really that intriguing after all. Sorry.
**Perhaps Hitler cats in Asianposes could restore their public adorableness factor.
posted by Sparx at 3:22 PM on December 17, 2009
*You know, when you think about it, I'm just being contrary for chuckles and it's not really that intriguing after all. Sorry.
**Perhaps Hitler cats in Asianposes could restore their public adorableness factor.
posted by Sparx at 3:22 PM on December 17, 2009
It's intriguing to note that it's perfectly OK to post blogs about men who look like old lesbians, but not people that look like ducks. Men who look like old lesbians can't actually do much about their appearance and have suitable appendages for disproving the appropriateness at being linked to some of the most Sapphic characters in human history, whereas these 'duckfaces' are publicly displaying their duckery elsewhere and can have their photos removed upon request. Won't someone think of the men who look like old lesbians?
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:52 PM on December 17, 2009
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:52 PM on December 17, 2009
It's intriguing to note that it's perfectly OK...
I'll presume that your it's is a contraction of IT WAS because that post is two years old and includes all sorts of other things including a rare "I'd hit it" from AstroZombie.
I'm aware that you're, how do you say it, taking the piss, but the "why is this okay but THAT not okay?" sort of game, while fun, gets as tiresome as peek-a-boo after a while.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 4:56 PM on December 17, 2009
I'll presume that your it's is a contraction of IT WAS because that post is two years old and includes all sorts of other things including a rare "I'd hit it" from AstroZombie.
I'm aware that you're, how do you say it, taking the piss, but the "why is this okay but THAT not okay?" sort of game, while fun, gets as tiresome as peek-a-boo after a while.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 4:56 PM on December 17, 2009
Yeah, totally taking the piss. I also happened to think that men who look like old lesbians was hilarious, and nowhere near as mean-spirited as the duckface one, so they're not really comparable.
But onto more important matters: who ever gets tired of playing peek-a-boo with a kid who's at that age where they're testing the waters of coping with separation anxiety?
Where did you go? Oh, there you are! *giggle* Where did you go? Oh, there you are! *giggle* Where did you go? Oh, there you are! *giggle* Where did you go? Oh, there you are! *giggle* Where did you go? Oh, there you are! *giggle*
It's amazing, not only that they seem to equate not being able to see your eyes with you somehow becoming invisible, but also that the same thing can be repeated so many times without the slightest sign of boredom.
This leads me to conclude that a child of that age is exactly equivalent in mentality to a dog chasing a stick.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:13 PM on December 17, 2009
But onto more important matters: who ever gets tired of playing peek-a-boo with a kid who's at that age where they're testing the waters of coping with separation anxiety?
Where did you go? Oh, there you are! *giggle* Where did you go? Oh, there you are! *giggle* Where did you go? Oh, there you are! *giggle* Where did you go? Oh, there you are! *giggle* Where did you go? Oh, there you are! *giggle*
It's amazing, not only that they seem to equate not being able to see your eyes with you somehow becoming invisible, but also that the same thing can be repeated so many times without the slightest sign of boredom.
This leads me to conclude that a child of that age is exactly equivalent in mentality to a dog chasing a stick.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:13 PM on December 17, 2009
It's amazing, not only that they seem to equate not being able to see your eyes with you somehow becoming invisible, but also that the same thing can be repeated so many times without the slightest sign of boredom.
This leads me to conclude that a child of that age is exactly equivalent in mentality to a dog chasing a stick.
Well, but, see, in such a scenario, you know who else is playing peek-a-boo with similarly sustained and more wildly exaggerated enthusiasm? YOU.
The baby is laughing at you, not with you. Babies find it simply hilarious that you are stupider and more easily amused than they are, and are immensely pleased that it is nothing but their own continued existence that fills you with such delight.
And thus shall yet another generation become a bunch of unjustifiably arrogant pricks. Well done!
posted by Sys Rq at 7:22 PM on December 17, 2009
This leads me to conclude that a child of that age is exactly equivalent in mentality to a dog chasing a stick.
Well, but, see, in such a scenario, you know who else is playing peek-a-boo with similarly sustained and more wildly exaggerated enthusiasm? YOU.
The baby is laughing at you, not with you. Babies find it simply hilarious that you are stupider and more easily amused than they are, and are immensely pleased that it is nothing but their own continued existence that fills you with such delight.
And thus shall yet another generation become a bunch of unjustifiably arrogant pricks. Well done!
posted by Sys Rq at 7:22 PM on December 17, 2009
As for the dog and his stick: It is obvious to anyone with half a mind that a dog returning a thrown stick to his owner is simply attempting, again and again, to communicate the message, Please end my pathetic life of confinement, solitude, rationed meals, daily abandonment, and the humiliation of forced public defecation by bashing my brains out with this chunk of wood. Please, for the love of God.
posted by Sys Rq at 7:31 PM on December 17, 2009
posted by Sys Rq at 7:31 PM on December 17, 2009
Hmm, the classifying may be postponed to the weekend while I learn R, which look seriously awesome.
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 8:27 PM on December 17, 2009
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 8:27 PM on December 17, 2009
"the "why is this okay but THAT not okay?" sort of game, while fun, gets as tiresome as peek-a-boo after a while"
Look, if peek-a-boo is wrong, I don't want to be right, okay?
posted by Afroblanco at 9:02 PM on December 17, 2009
Look, if peek-a-boo is wrong, I don't want to be right, okay?
posted by Afroblanco at 9:02 PM on December 17, 2009
I think the exchange between UbuRoivas and Jessamyn just crystalized my thinking on this.
When I first got here, the phrase "best of the web" meant "most interesting" - lots of bizarre stuff made the front page, and that was okay. I missed it the first time it was posted, but the men who look like old lesbians link is fascinating, and, as usual, some tiny percentage of the discussion was actually interesting. However, something has clearly changed over the last couple of years, and that comes through loud and clear in Jessamyn's response to UbuRoivas.
My concern has nothing to do with heavier in-thread moderating that Jessamyn described above on the 16th - I think it's not nearly heavy enough. I would guess that in most threads, we could eliminate 75% or more of comments and not lose anything. Just look at all the jokery in this thread. I am trying to work out what's bothering me about something that has been an huge part of my life for the last 8 years, and people are rehashing the tired "in Soviet Russia" line and going on about recursive footnotes.
I know, somebody call the whaaaaambulance for me. It's not a new story: community grows and changes in ways that make long time members uncomfortable. It's just that this time it's happening to me, and it's weird.
posted by Irontom at 5:29 AM on December 18, 2009
When I first got here, the phrase "best of the web" meant "most interesting" - lots of bizarre stuff made the front page, and that was okay. I missed it the first time it was posted, but the men who look like old lesbians link is fascinating, and, as usual, some tiny percentage of the discussion was actually interesting. However, something has clearly changed over the last couple of years, and that comes through loud and clear in Jessamyn's response to UbuRoivas.
My concern has nothing to do with heavier in-thread moderating that Jessamyn described above on the 16th - I think it's not nearly heavy enough. I would guess that in most threads, we could eliminate 75% or more of comments and not lose anything. Just look at all the jokery in this thread. I am trying to work out what's bothering me about something that has been an huge part of my life for the last 8 years, and people are rehashing the tired "in Soviet Russia" line and going on about recursive footnotes.
I know, somebody call the whaaaaambulance for me. It's not a new story: community grows and changes in ways that make long time members uncomfortable. It's just that this time it's happening to me, and it's weird.
posted by Irontom at 5:29 AM on December 18, 2009
Just look at all the jokery in this thread. I am trying to work out what's bothering me about something that has been an huge part of my life for the last 8 years, and people are rehashing the tired "in Soviet Russia" line and going on about recursive footnotes.
I think that happens because of the collective understanding that it's OK to do that in MetaTalk. And I think that serves a couple of useful purposes. It acts as a release valve, so that people are less tempted to do this elsewhere on the site. And it probably forms a closer-knit community through just being silly together and letting the conversation wander.
It does sometimes annoy me when there's still a serious discussion going on in a MeTa thread, and it gets derailed this way. I say that even though I suspect I'm sometimes one of the perpetrators of the derailing. So I'd be in favor of a little more comment moderation even in MeTa as long as the real discussion is still going on.
posted by FishBike at 8:15 AM on December 18, 2009
I think that happens because of the collective understanding that it's OK to do that in MetaTalk. And I think that serves a couple of useful purposes. It acts as a release valve, so that people are less tempted to do this elsewhere on the site. And it probably forms a closer-knit community through just being silly together and letting the conversation wander.
It does sometimes annoy me when there's still a serious discussion going on in a MeTa thread, and it gets derailed this way. I say that even though I suspect I'm sometimes one of the perpetrators of the derailing. So I'd be in favor of a little more comment moderation even in MeTa as long as the real discussion is still going on.
posted by FishBike at 8:15 AM on December 18, 2009
The thing that really changed for me [and I'm aware that I have a fairly unique perspective on all of this because I have maybe a larger degree of control here] is that the community is large enough that I see different sub-communities within the larger one, and some of them have a sort of private language that ... maybe isn't mine? I'm not sure how to explain this, but the hamburger=sarcasm has caught on with a bunch of people and some people use @notation and I look at both of those thigns with a o_O sort of look on my face.
Also, the subsites have really evolved into different places. We have huge groups of users that very rarely go to other parts of the site and a pretty small group of users who interact on all the three major subsites [and some people who mostly just interact on Music, a place that is often invisible to people who don't go there]. Each subsite has a different population and a different moderation style [you mention the jokery in this thread, but that's what MeTa has always been to me, personally] and I think the moderation style has influenced how the site has grown and evolved. That said, they're all still MeFites and there' s a "one of us" sense here in any case, but it's definitely the feeling of a more mature community where maybe everyone doesn't always interact with everyone else.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:18 AM on December 18, 2009
Also, the subsites have really evolved into different places. We have huge groups of users that very rarely go to other parts of the site and a pretty small group of users who interact on all the three major subsites [and some people who mostly just interact on Music, a place that is often invisible to people who don't go there]. Each subsite has a different population and a different moderation style [you mention the jokery in this thread, but that's what MeTa has always been to me, personally] and I think the moderation style has influenced how the site has grown and evolved. That said, they're all still MeFites and there' s a "one of us" sense here in any case, but it's definitely the feeling of a more mature community where maybe everyone doesn't always interact with everyone else.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:18 AM on December 18, 2009
Metafilter grew from a small town to a small city.
posted by vacapinta at 8:24 AM on December 18, 2009
posted by vacapinta at 8:24 AM on December 18, 2009
And yet there's still no mass transit system.
What do you call your recent activity page?
posted by The Whelk at 8:45 AM on December 18, 2009
What do you call your recent activity page?
posted by The Whelk at 8:45 AM on December 18, 2009
Irontom: Life is about dealing with loss. The older you get, the more losses you experience, until the ultimate loss—death. "All good things must come to an end" is not an empty platitude.
posted by Crabby Appleton at 8:52 AM on December 18, 2009
posted by Crabby Appleton at 8:52 AM on December 18, 2009
Corner hookup.
Alright then, who's holding?
favorites, I mean.
posted by The Whelk at 8:54 AM on December 18, 2009
Alright then, who's holding?
favorites, I mean.
posted by The Whelk at 8:54 AM on December 18, 2009
Where did you go? Oh, there you are! *giggle* Where did you go? Oh, there you are! *giggle* Where did you go? Oh, there you are! *giggle* Where did you go? Oh, there you are! *giggle* Where did you go? Oh, there you are! *giggle*
*bounces up and down on office chair and giggles*
Ok, now who said something about chasing a stick? Man, I love these slow days at work.
posted by 1f2frfbf at 9:06 AM on December 18, 2009
*bounces up and down on office chair and giggles*
Ok, now who said something about chasing a stick? Man, I love these slow days at work.
posted by 1f2frfbf at 9:06 AM on December 18, 2009
[you mention the jokery in this thread, but that's what MeTa has always been to me, personally]
Me too.
posted by timeistight at 9:18 AM on December 18, 2009
Me too.
posted by timeistight at 9:18 AM on December 18, 2009
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by smackfu at 8:37 AM on December 16, 2009 [25 favorites]