Here Today, Gone Tomorrow

May 13, 2010 9:15 PM

Pony request: number users logged on and when user last logged on.

In the upper right corner where it says "welcome back (your username)" followed by the MeMail icon and the sign out link, could a field be added to report a total of the number of currently logged on users? Second, on the profile pages, could a field be added to report the date the individual user last logged on?

The information could be useful for awareness of site-wide and individual activity. In my former life I was a performance analyst. That makes me naturally curious.

posted by netbros to Feature Requests at 9:15 PM (81 comments total)

I never log out but I'm not always here.
posted by tellurian at 9:17 PM on May 13, 2010 [4 favorites]

I'm always here but sometimes you go away.
posted by Confess, Fletch at 9:20 PM on May 13, 2010 [6 favorites]

See, the thing is, I know websites - even MeFi - collect data on me, along with my ISP, my phone company, my gas and electric company, and who knows who all else - and I accept that as a necessary evil to engage fully in the New Wonderful World Wide World. I just don't like being reminded of that necessary evil at every moment.

"Welcome back, yhbc! Oh ... are you wearing that shirt again?"
posted by yhbc at 9:22 PM on May 13, 2010 [7 favorites]

I'm watching you all through your webcams.
posted by Burhanistan at 9:23 PM on May 13, 2010

Second, on the profile pages, could a field be added to report the date the individual user last logged on?

Only if it's opt-in.
posted by grouse at 9:24 PM on May 13, 2010 [7 favorites]

I was having a discussion recently with one of our Mefight Club members about the Big Red Button here, the one to close one's account, and whether it made sense to have something like that for our site. My thesis was that, if there were a field on your profile that showed when you last logged in here, it would make the account-closure button superfluous except in situations where someone was throwing a hissy fit or looking for attention. Because we have a last-logged-in field on profiles there (and less drama in general, mostly because we're smaller and more niche-focussed, I think), I figured it wasn't really necessary.

That may or may not be true, but I do think a last-logged-in field is not something that could be reasonably thought of as privacy-invasive, and a community-building plus.

For logged-in users on the front page, I've always assumed specificity on exact user numbers might mean fewer ad dollars, which isn't good for Matt&co or us as users.

On preview, unsurprisingly, I see that there are people who don't want others to know when they last logged in. Ah Metafilter, the Home of The Outliers.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:27 PM on May 13, 2010

I've never been here. Ever.
posted by contessa at 9:27 PM on May 13, 2010

yhbc, it's not so much that it's a "that shirt, again?" thing, it's that we sort of feel you're more of an Autumn, and that such a bright green doesn't really suit you.
posted by Ghidorah at 9:54 PM on May 13, 2010 [2 favorites]

The main problem I see with this is that quite a few users are logged in ALL THE TIME, and on multiple computers, to boot. Metafilter never bothers to log you out, anyway.

So they'd have to keep track of the last time any user loaded a page, or something like they do to show the (n new) on the main pages. But I have a vague, possibly false, memory that they mostly did that on the user/cookie side and not on the server.
posted by that girl at 9:54 PM on May 13, 2010

netbros: "The information could be useful for awareness of site-wide and individual activity"

I like to use, you know, the site-wide activity as an indicator of site-wide activity. For instance, this post is getting replies, so I know that people are replying to it.

...

"Last logged in" sort of things are murderous nonsense to code and keep even vaguely accurate unless you're using some kind of weird flash or maybe an ajax "reverse ping" sort of thing.
posted by boo_radley at 10:02 PM on May 13, 2010

I'd like to know how many users are looking at AskMe right now so I can ask my very important snowflake question when there's LOTS of people.
posted by b33j at 10:18 PM on May 13, 2010 [1 favorite]

netbros: The information could be useful for awareness of site-wide and individual activity

I have to side with yhbc on this one— Nobody cares what you're doing on MetaFilter; it's all about what you are wearing.

As such, I propose adding pants status to user profiles.

Pants ON / Pants OFF

Webcam optional.
posted by carsonb at 10:29 PM on May 13, 2010 [3 favorites]

But what if you're wearing Schrödinger's pants?
posted by Burhanistan at 10:33 PM on May 13, 2010

That's neither here nor there.
posted by carsonb at 10:35 PM on May 13, 2010 [8 favorites]

I'd really prefer we didn't have a 'user last logged on' notation unless we could turn it off.
posted by winna at 10:35 PM on May 13, 2010

How about it shows when you logged on last, how often you log on per week, then how that ranks and who the top ten logger-oners per week are, .

Or what about an amazon-esque feature ... "users who responsed to this askme also posted to this meta thread"...?

Or a direct link to share on facebook/digg/twitter?

Only one of those features I am actually serious about
posted by Admira at 11:14 PM on May 13, 2010 [1 favorite]

I include "miniskirt" as part of my gender in my profile; I think that makes me a Schrodinger's Pants person.

Also, yhbc, I really think you should consider the maroon, it would really bring out the highlights in your hair.
posted by NoraReed at 11:41 PM on May 13, 2010

I'm watching you all through your webcams.

Not mine. I've got a piece of paper taped over it.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 11:42 PM on May 13, 2010

Must we quantify everything?

There are eleven words in this response.
posted by iamkimiam at 12:37 AM on May 14, 2010 [2 favorites]

When will people figure out that no more feature requests are welcome here?
posted by cj_ at 1:14 AM on May 14, 2010

PonyFilter: Could we have a feature that blocks feature request posts in MetaTalk?
posted by Ghidorah at 1:17 AM on May 14, 2010

I do not wear pants at Metafilter. I believe the wearing of pants to be rude and unfriendly and not conducive at all to the collapsing of waveforms.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:04 AM on May 14, 2010

I'm watching you all through your webcams.

if I told them once I told them a thousand times, boys, just because the technology is there doesn't mean you have to install it in the kitchen...

meh
posted by infini at 2:55 AM on May 14, 2010

Burhanistan: "I'm watching you all through your webcams"

Oh, yeah? Well, take a look at this!

While it may be interesting to know general information like how many people are logged on or viewing at any given time, I don't know how important it is. Personally, I don't really like boards that show you "online!" or your last login; it's a little intrusive, and I could imagine it being a little bit like stalker fodder. I mean, not on the same scale as a GPS chip implanted beneath the skin where anyone can track you, but... can't we just talk?
posted by Red Loop at 3:23 AM on May 14, 2010

Ah Metafilter, the Home of The Outliers.

If MetaFilter ever forms a sports team, there's our name right there. Let's go, 'li-ers *clapclapclap*

Ob pony, you can already go to "View All Activity" on their user page and that seems good enough for a "last seen" type field; if that information percolated up to the user page under "Joined:" then it doesn't seem like that big of a privacy creep (if it were even a link to post to their most recent post/comment, even better) since it's something you can find out in a couple more clicks anyway.

But I too am against showing a more pure "logged on" kind of thing. Sometimes you want to be seen at the party, and sometimes you just want to put on sunglasses and shuffle in the morning after to pick up your pants.
posted by fleacircus at 3:23 AM on May 14, 2010

No thanks.
posted by knapah at 3:57 AM on May 14, 2010

I thought Metafilter was pretty much an unused website nowadays.
posted by TedW at 4:20 AM on May 14, 2010 [5 favorites]

netbros, I haven't seen any jokes posted by you lately. Maybe I'm just reading the wrong threads, but that makes me sad.
posted by inigo2 at 4:32 AM on May 14, 2010

The last time I logged out of MetaFilter was when I was using my wife's computer in the airport last summer. I don't really care how many users where online way back then.
posted by theichibun at 4:44 AM on May 14, 2010

I'm watching you all through your webcams.
Not mine. I've got a piece of paper taped over it.

There are [2] paranoid users logged in.

I do that (with a post-it). Do you really do that? Or are you joking about being paranoid, whereas I'm actually paranoid?

I can deal with people knowing my IP address, but no one needs to see me sitting in my underwear.
posted by pracowity at 4:47 AM on May 14, 2010

For safety, I embroidered my IP address on my underwear, so I'd rather you didn't see either.
posted by DU at 4:53 AM on May 14, 2010

I do that (with a post-it). Do you really do that? Or are you joking about being paranoid, whereas I'm actually paranoid?

I do that. Even though I disabled it, I still do cover it. I'm that paranoid.
posted by inigo2 at 4:54 AM on May 14, 2010

I can log out any time I like, but I can never leave.
posted by Pater Aletheias at 4:55 AM on May 14, 2010 [1 favorite]

mirrors on the ceiling...


gets wholly distracted and wanders off moping
posted by infini at 5:06 AM on May 14, 2010

I do that. Even though I disabled it, I still do cover it. I'm that paranoid.

Then why do you leave your curtains open like that?
posted by pracowity at 5:09 AM on May 14, 2010 [1 favorite]

I would like to have this for other people, but that does not outweigh how much I'd prefer not to have it for me.

For example, let's say that I'm busy at work so I don't respond to someone's e-mails and then I get home and I'm like "sorry, sweetheart, I didn't have time to write back to you today" and then he's like "Oh but I noticed you had time to log in to Metafilter" and I'm like "Oh, um, yeah, I needed to do that to relax" (which is true) and he's like "Oh I see so talking to me isn't relaxing?" and I say "Not when you are accusing me of loving Metafilter more than I love you" and he says "Fine!" and I say "FINE!" and then we are in a fight.¹

In all seriousness, although my husband is a reasonable person, I am not and I totally forsee this as a potential consequence not only with my husband but with EVERYONE so I would prefer that people not know whether or not I was logged in.

¹This would totally not happen because he is understanding, but one time I did guess that an anonymous question had been posted by him, so that was pretty awesome.
posted by Mrs. Pterodactyl at 5:10 AM on May 14, 2010 [5 favorites]

If we are going to do this, I want it to be indicated by color and brightness, a little like a mood ring. If metatalk is active and comments are being deleted, the screen should be red and throbbing, and I should see a flash and hear a thunder crack when an account is disabled.
posted by pracowity at 5:17 AM on May 14, 2010 [7 favorites]

Must we quantify everything?

Oh my, yes.
posted by FishBike at 5:18 AM on May 14, 2010 [11 favorites]

I do that (with a post-it). Do you really do that? Or are you joking about being paranoid, whereas I'm actually paranoid?

I do that. Even though I disabled it, I still do cover it. I'm that paranoid.

Thank goodness I'm not the only one!
posted by amyms at 5:35 AM on May 14, 2010

Second, on the profile pages, could a field be added to report the date the individual user last logged on?

Not sure how other peopel from Team Mod feel about that, but despite agreeing with stav about how this could be useful I'm pretty sure this is a non-starter because too many people would find it problematic, and if we made it opt-in it sort of defeats the purpose of having it. We can see when someone last logged in on the admin side [that is, we can see the last time they did something on the site that was cookie-based I think] and I always consider it pretty much private not-for-sharing information.

I'd sort of like to know how many users were logged in at any given time, however.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 5:50 AM on May 14, 2010

ExpressionEngine does something like this (scroll to bottom for stats) along with a nifty plugin that can show what users are currently online.

I don't think we need to know that info. It's interesting sure and I could swear Matt or Cortex has a graph around that shows usage stats throughout the day/month. But otherwise, it's not really useful for gauging site or individual activity, 'cause we're global, yet individual. We care about site usage in a general sense, but we most care about our individual needs and uses of the site.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:56 AM on May 14, 2010

I'd sort of like to know how many users were logged in at any given time, however.

I would too, even though there's not much practical use for this information as a regular user.

We can sort of get a general idea of this from the Infodump, but it's horribly inaccurate since that only counts users doing something with Infodump visibility (posting, commenting, or favoriting). There are plenty of users who are logged on and just reading the site.
posted by FishBike at 6:04 AM on May 14, 2010

I have never logged out. People who do log out make me question their commitment to Sparklemotion.
posted by Babblesort at 6:15 AM on May 14, 2010

I only plug in the cam when I'm using it. I put in a USB extension cord so I wouldn't have to get on my knees and move my tower every time I wanted to do so.

And even though it's unplugged, I stytill turn the cam towards the wall. Irrational, I know. But still, otherwise it stares at me....
posted by zarq at 6:16 AM on May 14, 2010

Oh my, yes.

I don't know if it's on purpose but I can only hear this as Professor Farnsworth. Good news everyone, we're going to quantify your logins.
posted by Babblesort at 6:18 AM on May 14, 2010 [3 favorites]

I do that. Even though I disabled it, I still do cover it. I'm that paranoid.

I have an even easier solution. I use a computer that doesn't have a webcam in the first place. (Because it still works and I can't justify the expense of buying a new one...)
posted by Karmakaze at 6:27 AM on May 14, 2010

could a field be added to report the date the individual user last logged on?

Please god no. Sometimes you just don't feel like answering that pissy memail, you know? DUDE I SAW YOU LOGGED IN WHY DIDNT YOU ANSWER MY PISSY MEMAIL
posted by ook at 6:30 AM on May 14, 2010

My general instinct is I'm Against It on both counts, out of a mix of feeling like it's kind of weird as a privacy reduction mechanism and a feeling like it doesn't necessarily do anything even to the degree that it can be accurately modeled (which, in my opinion, is not very).

Mrs. Pterodactyl's dialogue is funny but on point; as it is it's possible to sort of deduce whether there's proof that someone has left some visible tracks on the site in the last however long by paging through their activity history for evidence, but that's as far as it goes. It's a little bit hard to do but it can be done if someone really, really wants to.

And I think that's a pretty good threshold, and that the info that's currently visible on userpages already is probably more than enough as far as that goes. Changing to an explicit "last logged on" thing makes it more casual in a way that I'm not sure of the need for.

And it's not a slam-dunk model of activity anyway. There are lots of things that a user can do that'd let the site know they're around but which doesn't leave visible tracks to other users (logging in, hitting index pages, flagging stuff, sending/reading mefimail, etc) that we could take into account if we wanted it to be more accurate, but at that point we'd be indirectly surfacing more detail about what someone's doing on the site than they might expect or care to have surfaced, again for a benefit that's not clear.

I've got similar objections to any List Of Who Is Logged On Right Now breakdown.

The alternative, How Many Are Logged On Right Now as a general number, bothers me less but also seems to have even less usefulness. What is anybody going to do with that information that will improve their contemporaneous use of the site? How does that number meaningfully contribute to successful or productive use of the site?

Calculating rough levels of activity in the near and distant past is totally doable, in a lot more precisely-controllable detail, with the Infodump, if what you're interested in is site activity over time. If you're worried about When To Post X, note that every shot someone's taken at charting the impact of overall site activity in terms of e.g. how many answers a question gets or how many comments a post gets seems to favor a pretty time-independent answer: when doesn't seem to matter much at all on average, as the site has more of a day-ish long heartbeat and output evens out in aggregate.
posted by cortex (staff) at 6:48 AM on May 14, 2010 [2 favorites]

I don't know if it's on purpose but I can only hear this as Professor Farnsworth.

(Yes, it's on purpose. Futurama is awesome.)
posted by FishBike at 6:49 AM on May 14, 2010

I just googled Sparklemotion and now I'm embarrassed to admit I've never seen Donnie Darko.
posted by slogger at 6:59 AM on May 14, 2010

"And even though it's unplugged, I still turn the cam towards the wall. Irrational, I know. But still, otherwise it stares at me...." I do that with my wife...
posted by HuronBob at 7:09 AM on May 14, 2010

Pokes
ook * Poke Back
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:11 AM on May 14, 2010

I really don't want proof of how much time I spend here.
posted by ThatCanadianGirl at 7:17 AM on May 14, 2010 [2 favorites]

Mrs. Pterodactyl's dialogue is funny but on point

Oh my God this is the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me; normally I'm one for two at best.
posted by Mrs. Pterodactyl at 7:18 AM on May 14, 2010

The less information presented about me for the sake of presenting information about me, the smaller my budget for tinfoil has to be.
posted by Hiker at 7:24 AM on May 14, 2010 [2 favorites]

The alternative, How Many Are Logged On Right Now as a general number, bothers me less but also seems to have even less usefulness. What is anybody going to do with that information that will improve their contemporaneous use of the site? How does that number meaningfully contribute to successful or productive use of the site?

I see this on a lot of web sites, and I think it's mostly there as a kind of "see, this is an active, busy web site and not the desolate wasteland you might otherwise believe it to be" indicator. It's probably also something built into the software that runs these sites, so the usefulness-to-effort ratio to implement it is reasonable.

Other than that, it would be sort of neat to see. That's a useful result in its own right when I'm the one who has to do the work to implement something. It's kind of hard to argue that when it's someone else who'd have to do it, though.

I can see how it would be useful to site operators to know a stat like that. Not just for tracking growth over time, but if you wake up one morning and it says there are 3 people logged on, and normally there are 3,000, that might indicate something is amiss.
posted by FishBike at 7:28 AM on May 14, 2010

If you log out, then Mefi reverts to that horrible non-professional dark blue background.
posted by octothorpe at 7:29 AM on May 14, 2010

Not mine. I've got a piece of paper taped over it.

My grandma actually did this for a while. We finally just unplugged it and put it in a box (and buried it under six feet of dirt).
posted by phunniemee at 7:37 AM on May 14, 2010

I see this on a lot of web sites, and I think it's mostly there as a kind of "see, this is an active, busy web site and not the desolate wasteland you might otherwise believe it to be" indicator.

Yeah, exactly. "Hey, man, my phpBB is totally viable" is the immediate association in my mind. Mefi has pretty solid critical mass, I'm not sure we get anything out of throwing a number at passersby to reassure them.

Other than that, it would be sort of neat to see.

Which I can dig. And as you say, how much of a motivation that is for the person asking vs. the person implementing is part of the deal there.

For my part, what I've actively thought about as the because-it-would-be-neat take on data crunching would be a like weekly/monthly/yearly snapshot of site activity, sort of a rolling Metafilter Zeitgeist with charts (activity over time) and lists (trending topics, etc), all hosted somewhere on the stuff.mf domain, for those who nerd out on such things.

But doing it right would take some work, and it hasn't really been a priority.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:45 AM on May 14, 2010 [1 favorite]

Mrs. Pterodactyl : Oh my God this is the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me;

I think we need to have an official Everyone-Says-Something-Nice-About-How-Awesome-Mrs._Pterodactyl-Is Day here.

I'll start: I enjoy the idea that you make hostesses try to spell the word "Pterodactyl" in their reservation books. It's evil. I respect that.
posted by quin at 7:47 AM on May 14, 2010

All of those 'users logged on' things are approximations anyway. There is no way to definitively tell who is using the site at any given time. For example, suppose I open five FPPs in tabs and then open all the links and start reading a bunch of long essays, and then I come back and read multiple 100+ post threads. Also suppose that this takes, say, two and half hours. Now, to me, I was definitely using the site in the sense that I had tabs open and I was interacting with content on the site. But to the server this situation is indistinguishable^* from the one where I open those same five FPPs in tabs and then 30 seconds later close my browser and go walk the dog.

So all you can do is approximate, you make up some arbitrary windowing number like 20 minutes and you say that you consider a user 'online' if the server has heard anything from them in that time period, otherwise they're not 'online'. If you make the window too large you artificially inflate the count, if it's too small you artificially deflate the count. It's messy and not accurate.

* Technically you could use javascript to send a heartbeat beacon to the server every N minutes while a page was open, and some scummy analytics packages do that, but I consider that reprehensible behavior and I'm sure nobody involved would tolerate it here. Even then, you can't definitively say anything because some people leave their computer running with the browser open when they leave.
posted by Rhomboid at 7:59 AM on May 14, 2010

All of those 'users logged on' things are approximations anyway.

Yeah, there would have to be some decisions about what constitutes "logged on" for the purposes of that kind of counter. I was assuming something along the same lines of the "... since your last visit" logic that currently exists.

If I remember correctly, if you keep loading pages then your visit gets extended, but if you don't hit the server for some period of time, your visit is considered ended and the next time you do something it's a new visit.

So a count of current, non-expired visits from the server's point of view, if you will.
posted by FishBike at 8:08 AM on May 14, 2010

I enjoy the idea that you make hostesses try to spell the word "Pterodactyl" in their reservation books. It's evil. I respect that.

Aw, thanks -- one of our friends once suggested that they could save time by spelling it "asshole".
posted by Mrs. Pterodactyl at 8:11 AM on May 14, 2010 [2 favorites]

"And even though it's unplugged, I still turn the cam towards the wall. Irrational, I know. But still, otherwise it stares at me...."

I do that with my wife...

That's not a good idea. You should keep your wife plugged in at all times - battery life on those is terrible.
posted by Karmakaze at 8:12 AM on May 14, 2010 [1 favorite]

I've always assumed specificity on exact user numbers might mean fewer ad dollars, which isn't good for Matt&co or us as users.

Nope, doesn't really have any effect on things at all. I actually (if you plumb the MetaTalk archives, you may find it) played with a "x users currently online" thing on the front page many years ago, using the exact number of open sessions (number of times someone with a MeFi cookie hit the server in the last 20min).

It was actually pretty exciting at the time, as during the workday you'd see hundreds of people concurrently online, but around midnight the number would fall to a couple dozen. I ended up retiring the feature a few days after it debuted because it was a drag on system resources. I kind of like what it did, which is remind everyone there are others around and maybe made it feel more explicitly like a community.

The last-login on a userpage could be useful, but without the feature here on day one, it's a privacy nightmare to reveal it 10+ years later on people so it's pretty much a non-starter.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 8:38 AM on May 14, 2010 [1 favorite]

I kind of like what it did, which is remind everyone there are others around and maybe made it feel more explicitly like a community.

Yes. I do hang out here quite a bit and it would be great to know what kind of company I've got.
posted by pwally at 8:46 AM on May 14, 2010

I was assuming something along the same lines of the "... since your last visit" logic that currently exists.

And that feature has been the subject of numerous MeTa threads due to the confusion that it causes on account of the rough approximation inherent in the method. I don't think it's a feature that needs cloning.
posted by Rhomboid at 8:51 AM on May 14, 2010

I think the active-session count (as proxy for number of currently active users) would be pretty neat. Have hardware upgrades made that any more practical now than it was at the time?

I missed it the first time around but it do think it would be interesting to know at various times how many other people are reading the site ... I guess I do have to cede Cortex's point that I'm not sure it would necessarily change my behavior in any way, certainly not in a dramatic way, but it would be fun to know.

There have been times when I've been on the site and it's been a bit "anybody here? anybody? Bueller?" and I've wondered whether there's genuinely only a few people reading the site, or if there are thousands of people waiting in the wings for a thread to jump on, just with nothing to say at that particular moment.

I suppose in an indirect way that might change site behavior, although I'm not sure exactly how.
posted by Kadin2048 at 8:53 AM on May 14, 2010

Thank goodness I'm not the only one!

*drags in the largest deepest hugbucket over to the ledge, sets up pulley, hauls rope...*

btw, while we're on this topic I'd like to Pony a request: I don't want non members being able to see my contacts and my favourites and my comments and all that stuff.

and I just realized which webcam you were all referring to and it now has a bright orange post it over it :) albeit disabled forever...
posted by infini at 9:14 AM on May 14, 2010

idiopath poked everyone @ MeFi
posted by idiopath at 9:21 AM on May 14, 2010

Welcome back jquinby!
Last logged in on May 5, 2010

Would it kill you to call?
posted by jquinby at 9:26 AM on May 14, 2010

Brandon Blatcher just logged in
would you like to make sexy talk with BB? _

posted by special-k at 9:56 AM on May 14, 2010 [2 favorites]

It would get weird if I saw that when logging in, 'cause I'm not sure of the answer.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:56 AM on May 14, 2010

which spouse you mean?
posted by infini at 11:04 AM on May 14, 2010

No, there's a schedule.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:34 AM on May 14, 2010

I'm so glad that logged in doesn't mean I can't leave the house because there are so many logs piled up around it.
posted by longsleeves at 12:08 PM on May 14, 2010 [1 favorite]

I don't exist when you don't see me.

/Sisters of Mercy
posted by Mister_A at 12:35 PM on May 14, 2010

I ordered some Dominos pizza online last night and left the order tracking page open until this morning. That was pretty embarrassing.
posted by turgid dahlia at 4:33 PM on May 14, 2010

I like these things for knowing that I'm not the only one awake.
posted by estlin at 10:38 PM on May 14, 2010

and feeling global, just sitting down with second cup of morning coffee :)
posted by infini at 11:49 PM on May 14, 2010

One of the first things that I did when I bought my laptop with the unasked-for webcam was to apply a very small amount of Methylene Chloride¹ to the plastic lens with a Q-tip. (Be sure to cover your screen if you try this, MC can frost it, too!)

I also neatly applied a tiny amount of epoxy to block the sound hole for the unasked-for built-in microphone.

If I ever need a microphone, I'll plug one in. I can't imagine ever needing a webcam.

1 - I did this at work, where I had access to MC. MEK, Toluene, Xylene and possibly even Methanol would all probably have worked just as well.
posted by double block and bleed at 11:48 PM on May 16, 2010