An appeal for an undoubling March 19, 2010 12:10 PM   Subscribe

Double indemnity? My post today was considered a double. Given (1) the original post was mostly an preview announcement from the Economist about the upcoming, still-unaired program and (2) that History of the World in 100 Objects is one of the most awesome things on the internet, I'd like to have something posted about this on the blue again for edification and discussion, even if it isn't my FPP.

More generally, as a long time MeFi-poster, I feel like there is a bit of an accelerating race to post early news about cool things even before they reach their potential. I think it might be occasionally relaxing the doubling standards when a previously posted-about site or event actually becomes interesting, cool, or useful in a new way. History of the World in 100 Objects deserves at least 2 posts over its life, if Lady Gaga deserves 2-3 a day (no aspersions on the Lady, of course).
posted by blahblahblah to Etiquette/Policy at 12:10 PM (60 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

Not that it entirely precludes a general discussion of the topic in here, but you did get my response to your email this morning acknowledging the sometimes-trickiness of grey area double stuff and explaining my reasoning for sticking with the deletion, right?
posted by cortex (staff) at 12:13 PM on March 19, 2010


I sort of wonder, in a very abstract sort of hypothetical way, what it would do to the site to have FPPs appear without the 'posted by' byline. I feel like the famousperson obitfilter glut would be reduced significantly, and we'd see a lot less 'Controversy News!'-type stuff, too. All of this may be projection. YMMV.
posted by shakespeherian at 12:14 PM on March 19, 2010 [2 favorites]


Nope, sorry cortex, somehow I didn't get it - I apologize, and I'll see if I can figure out where it went.
posted by blahblahblah at 12:14 PM on March 19, 2010


I vote no, don't reinstate it.

This is a vote, right?
posted by Plutor at 12:16 PM on March 19, 2010


Don't blame me I voted for Kodos.
posted by Babblesort at 12:18 PM on March 19, 2010


More seriously: If this event was a victim of a "race to post early news", infini wouldn't have written two paragraphs, wouldn't have found half a dozen good supporting links, wouldn't have linked the the "via", and wouldn't have included a postal address on the "more inside". This was a post about a miniseries that was going to be on TV shortly and was asking for input from viewers. I don't think making those kinds of posts somehow non-kosher or allowing every event (no matter how insignificant) to get both a pre-post and a post-post is silly.

blahblahblah: "History of the World in 100 Objects deserves at least 2 posts over its life, if Lady Gaga deserves 2-3 a day (no aspersions on the Lady, of course). "

Actually: 7 so far this year, 3-4 of which she's not really the focus. Yes, overdone. But at least they're all to original facets. If you can find Barbie dolls modeled after David Attenborough, feel free to post it.

On second thought, please do post it.
posted by Plutor at 12:23 PM on March 19, 2010


What is the problem with just adding the new material to the original post?? I frankly prefer an early post, assuming it isn't a mess, to the idea of waiting for the perfect post and dumping one already in progress.
posted by bearwife at 12:26 PM on March 19, 2010


You can't help it if dumbasses jump the gun. Update the earlier thread.
posted by Ironmouth at 12:26 PM on March 19, 2010 [1 favorite]


I think it'd be neat to have this posted again once all 100 have been done, next fall.
posted by Greg Nog at 12:29 PM on March 19, 2010 [1 favorite]


No sweat, blahblahblah, it might have gotten gummed up in a spam box or something. Let me know if you don't find it.

I'll paste in what I said there:
It's a bit of a shame that the timing on the first post pre-empted the actual content going up, but it was pretty manifestly posted about and not that long ago. So I think this is more of a "yay, interested people are probably checking the site out now" situation than anything that really merits re-inventing the wheel with an update post, much as that's gotta be sort of annoying for you having put the post together. So: sympathies. Thanks for being a good sport.
Basically, for better or for worse in specific cases, we're inclined to stick with the very-straightforward rule that if it was posted about, it was posted about, and look at the question of doublish followups more on the basis of really stark changes, usually over a fair amount of time, in what a doubled site/subject is about when there's a very specific referent.

Which means sometimes there's a weird mushiness to the answers of basic questions like "has it been long enough?" and "what is new?" This, for example, is a case where I feel like it hasn't really been long enough to just revisit it to say "hey, the site's up now", even though I understand your point that materially there is a new thing here in that the site wasn't previously available. Folks interested in the subject have a pretty reasonable chance of getting to the site on their own thanks to the previous post, so it doesn't seem like there's a compelling argument for exceptional treatment here, even though I can totally understand the inclination to make said argument and don't think it's entirely without merit.
posted by cortex (staff) at 12:32 PM on March 19, 2010 [1 favorite]


if Lady Gaga deserves 2-3 a day

We have, by point of example, deleted at least one and probably more than one Gaga-related doubles. New vs. not-new can be a little sticky, but two posts about Telephone, for example, is one too many, and if it got to the point of people making lazy posts about every new thing she puts out that'd be moving into heavier-deletion-hand territory in its own right. See also: political cycles.
posted by cortex (staff) at 12:34 PM on March 19, 2010 [1 favorite]


Ironmouth and bearwife, fine, assuming the best solution is to update the earlier thread. How would someone actually do that? It is closed for new comments...

And I should say that I think the announcement of a miniseries before it airs is fine on the blue, I guess, but there is little "there" there. The 100 Objects website and podcast, now that it is launched, is a thing of greatness, and deserves mention, and it did not exist at the time of the FPP. Anyhow, no point crying over sour beans, and, on preview, I see cortex has replied, so I'll give him the final word.

And maybe I'll post again when all 100 objects are done in the Fall....
posted by blahblahblah at 12:35 PM on March 19, 2010


When a thread is closed for new comments, a lot of people seem to post the update here in metatalk. So I guess this would be the equivalent action.
posted by Think_Long at 12:44 PM on March 19, 2010


We had three posts in the course of a month for Joanna Newsom's Have One On me; one was mine, announcing the first single, then came a link to an interview with Newsom about the album, and the last was a link to the album.
posted by Rory Marinich at 12:45 PM on March 19, 2010


It seems that it is now mandatory for there to be a MeTa post about every deletion in the blue. Maybe PB should modify the code so that a MeTa is created automatically when a post is removed, and mail sent to the original poster so that they know where to weep and moan about the unfairness of it all.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 12:52 PM on March 19, 2010 [1 favorite]


It seems that it is now mandatory for there to be a MeTa post about every deletion in the blue. Maybe PB should modify the code so that a MeTa is created automatically when a post is removed, and mail sent to the original poster so that they know where to weep and moan about the unfairness of it all.

Statistically speaking, I'm pretty sure it actually happens pretty rarely.
posted by zarq at 12:57 PM on March 19, 2010


People who do not like MeTa posts or their frequency are welcome, nay invited, to not read them.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:59 PM on March 19, 2010 [15 favorites]



We had three posts in the course of a month for Joanna Newsom's Have One On me; one was mine, announcing the first single, then came a link to an interview with Newsom about the album, and the last was a link to the album.


All that hubbub and only 7,000 copies sold. Sad.
posted by Dr-Baa at 1:01 PM on March 19, 2010


It seems that it is now mandatory for MetaTalk comments to include baseless hyperbole.
posted by grouse at 1:01 PM on March 19, 2010


I think the toilet restaurant in Japan should get at least 2 posts per year. I mean come on, it's a restaurant where you eat out of a toilet.
posted by Meatbomb at 1:12 PM on March 19, 2010 [5 favorites]


It seems that it is now mandatory for there to be a MeTa post about every deletion in the blue.

It would be nice if people would not use local spikes in behavior as a reason to make hyperbolic/sarcastic claims about how the site or its users behave in general. There's been a bit of this lately and it frustrates the heck out of me because it just kind of makes dealing with policy and metadiscussion stuff all that harder.

Framing things in terms of some exaggerated version of how this place works, rather than just making plain, fair, grounded observations about what you see happening or what you feel like is or is not a problem is a very poor way of setting the groundwork for an actual reasonable community discussion about how people use the site and react to what happens on it.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:14 PM on March 19, 2010


It seems that it is now mandatory for MetaTalk comments made by Meatbomb at 1:12 PM (PST) on March 19, 2010 to include the word "toilet."
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:15 PM on March 19, 2010 [2 favorites]


All that hubbub and only 7,000 copies sold. Sad.

Well, yes but each and every one of those kids went out and bought a harp.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 1:15 PM on March 19, 2010 [6 favorites]


It is also mandatory for me to favorite comments that meet the criteria laid out by my esteemed colleague, Professor Doctor It's Raining Florence Henderson.
posted by Mister_A at 1:20 PM on March 19, 2010


People who do not like MeTa posts or their frequency are welcome, nay invited, to not read them.

Wait, that's an actual option?!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:53 PM on March 19, 2010


Not for you. Keep reading.
posted by Think_Long at 1:56 PM on March 19, 2010 [1 favorite]


See also: political cycles.

How many deleted Healthcare threads are there going to be this weekend? I'm guessing at least 3
posted by Think_Long at 1:59 PM on March 19, 2010


I can't keep reading if you're not posting anything!!!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:11 PM on March 19, 2010


Here's the other double before your double was a double.

yo dawg.....
posted by cashman at 2:14 PM on March 19, 2010


Wow, that original double linked to an RSS feed and an MP3. Yikes!
posted by Sys Rq at 2:21 PM on March 19, 2010


It shouldn't be reposted. It should be posted NOW for the FIRST time. It shouldn't have been posted the before because it didn't exist yet.
posted by DU at 2:34 PM on March 19, 2010


grouse : It seems that it is now mandatory for MetaTalk comments to include baseless hyperbole.

Damn it! I read that as "badass hyperbole" and I was going to get really excited about the concept; is it hyperbole about being badass, like "Some people can tear phone books in half, I'm so hardcore I tear phone booths in two." or is it hyperbole about a bad ass, like "My donkey used to be a political dissident that set fire to a few federal buildings."

But no... "baseless".

*sigh*

Mine would have been more fun.
posted by quin at 2:47 PM on March 19, 2010 [3 favorites]


baseless hyperbole is when you claim someone's batting average is literally .000
posted by cortex (staff) at 2:55 PM on March 19, 2010 [3 favorites]


i try to ignore metatalk threads but my grandson turned off my google and now when i go to internet it just goes here. if you could unsubscribe me and let google know i'd like them back that would be very helpful THIS ISN'T FUNNY JIMMY
posted by graventy at 3:05 PM on March 19, 2010 [2 favorites]


Graventy,

To change your homepage back to Google:

In Internet Explorer

In Safari

In FireFox

In Chrome
posted by zarq at 3:17 PM on March 19, 2010


Unless of course you were kidding, in which case.... nevermind.
posted by zarq at 3:18 PM on March 19, 2010 [1 favorite]


*snicker*
posted by elizardbits at 3:20 PM on March 19, 2010


zarq: I believe it was a reference to this, but your gungho willingness to help is absolutely adorable.
posted by Think_Long at 3:22 PM on March 19, 2010 [3 favorites]


I greatly appreciate your willingness to help, and apologize for the lack of hamburger. PLEASE DON'T UNSUBSCRIBE ME
posted by graventy at 3:26 PM on March 19, 2010


Oh.

Um.

I missed that post. That's hilarious. :)


I'll just chuck these helpful links I found explaining how graventy can change his home page in Opera and the AOL browser, then.

Thank you, Think Long. ;)
posted by zarq at 3:30 PM on March 19, 2010


When medicinal ganja comes to Illinois I will be opening up a retro-cyberpunk coffeehouse called HYPERBOLE.
posted by jtron at 5:41 PM on March 19, 2010


Is this facebook?
posted by qvantamon at 6:02 PM on March 19, 2010


I just want to say that I cannot believe how consistently patient and reasonable and gracious cortex and jessamym are. Seriously. I've been reading through some old threads in the past week, and just seeing you both here now made me want to mention this. You guys are good at what you do!
posted by ThatCanadianGirl at 6:11 PM on March 19, 2010 [1 favorite]


WHAT THE HELL IS THAT SUPPOSED TO MEAN
posted by cortex (staff) at 6:29 PM on March 19, 2010 [3 favorites]


YOU SPELLED MY NAME WRONG WTF??!!?
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:32 PM on March 19, 2010 [4 favorites]


No, she didn't, and jessamym woulda realized that
posted by jtron at 6:58 PM on March 19, 2010


maybe we should just give them both a free kitten.
posted by lester at 7:06 PM on March 19, 2010


I know that free kitten scam. Step off.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:33 PM on March 19, 2010


A free dead kitten, then.
posted by Sys Rq at 7:46 PM on March 19, 2010


jessamym is the Canadian spelling. Actually she spelled courtex wrong.
posted by qvantamon at 8:02 PM on March 19, 2010 [6 favorites]


The extra m is in honor of the double post.
posted by Babblesort at 9:01 PM on March 19, 2010


It seems that it is now mandatory.
posted by flabdablet at 10:45 PM on March 19, 2010


I love Canadia
posted by Joseph Gurl at 2:41 AM on March 20, 2010


It wasn't a double, it was a triple, since this was the double. It's definitely best of the Web.
posted by RussHy at 5:18 AM on March 20, 2010


I have a pea under my split hair shirt.
posted by y2karl at 8:03 AM on March 20, 2010


...jessaMYN.....
posted by ThatCanadianGirl at 8:45 AM on March 20, 2010


It wasn't a double, it was a triple, since this was the double.

Double.
posted by cashman at 6:17 PM on March 20, 2010


Quits.
posted by flabdablet at 1:07 AM on March 21, 2010


oh dear, i'm late to the party aren't i? where's my watch?
posted by infini at 1:16 AM on March 21, 2010


Hell, I'm batting (just) over .750. I figure I'm a Major League MeFite Hall of Famer (I'm still working on my, er, the trophy.)
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:53 PM on March 23, 2010


« Older Glasgow meetup ?   |   Calling London... Newer »

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