Who/what is cortex referring to? October 16, 2010 12:56 PM Subscribe
I have been puzzled by the deletion of this post all day. I want to know the story and couldn't find any answers searching around Metafilter. Anyone know what cortex is referring to?
I am not complaining, just curious.
I am not complaining, just curious.
Huh, thanks.
In that light it's a pretty awesome deletion reason.
posted by kittensofthenight at 1:06 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
In that light it's a pretty awesome deletion reason.
posted by kittensofthenight at 1:06 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
And it's been going on for 9 years?
That's dedication.
posted by kittensofthenight at 1:08 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
That's dedication.
posted by kittensofthenight at 1:08 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
I was wondering about this too. I'm assuming you've communicated with him about not being welcome. How does he react to that?
(please disregard if it would be inappropriate to go into more detail)
posted by emilyd22222 at 1:09 PM on October 16, 2010
(please disregard if it would be inappropriate to go into more detail)
posted by emilyd22222 at 1:09 PM on October 16, 2010
And it's been going on for 9 years?
Why is that account still (apparently) active?
posted by emilyd22222 at 1:10 PM on October 16, 2010
Why is that account still (apparently) active?
posted by emilyd22222 at 1:10 PM on October 16, 2010
And it's been going on for 9 years?
As far as I know that account is not one of the many involved. Different surname. Many years at least, though, yes.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:10 PM on October 16, 2010
As far as I know that account is not one of the many involved. Different surname. Many years at least, though, yes.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:10 PM on October 16, 2010
Oops. I searched for Aditya, that was all that came up.
posted by kittensofthenight at 1:25 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by kittensofthenight at 1:25 PM on October 16, 2010
Aditya's a pretty common Indian name.
posted by peacheater at 1:32 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by peacheater at 1:32 PM on October 16, 2010
sorry to derail but what happened to that weird football thread? i have the greasemonkey script for deleted threads and it's not showing up.
posted by morganannie at 1:33 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by morganannie at 1:33 PM on October 16, 2010
The deletion detection scripts start counting down from the highest visible thread id on the front page, looking for gaps. As a result, if the deleted thread was the most recent post then the script will start counting down from a lower thread id value and never notice it's missing in the first place. That'll change once there's another post.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:38 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:38 PM on October 16, 2010
Aha! Thanks.
posted by morganannie at 1:42 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by morganannie at 1:42 PM on October 16, 2010
If you can't wait for the next post, you can just type in the most recent thread's url and add 1.
http://www.metafilter.com/96738
posted by ActingTheGoat at 2:00 PM on October 16, 2010
http://www.metafilter.com/96738
posted by ActingTheGoat at 2:00 PM on October 16, 2010
It's interesting how every single web forum I've ever frequented (and I've frequented a lot) has at least one of these obsessive crazies. All I would say to these people is please, in the bowels of Christ I beseech you, think it possible that you may be a mad fucker.
posted by Decani at 2:02 PM on October 16, 2010 [6 favorites]
posted by Decani at 2:02 PM on October 16, 2010 [6 favorites]
If you can't wait for the next post, you can just type in the most recent thread's url and add 1.
Wait, there's another way to find new posts?
posted by Joe in Australia at 2:16 PM on October 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
Wait, there's another way to find new posts?
posted by Joe in Australia at 2:16 PM on October 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
cortex writes "in at least one case co-opting someone's functionally abandoned account (presumably with their permission but without telling them why, exactly, he needed to do that)."
Is this the 27Ker who recently got self link banned? I was somewhat admiring his dedication.
posted by Mitheral at 2:21 PM on October 16, 2010
Is this the 27Ker who recently got self link banned? I was somewhat admiring his dedication.
posted by Mitheral at 2:21 PM on October 16, 2010
The user keeps trying to sneak back in - to post stuff like that lame-arsed crap?
Why?
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:28 PM on October 16, 2010
Why?
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:28 PM on October 16, 2010
The user keeps trying to sneak back in - to post stuff like that lame-arsed crap?
Why?
AT a guess, for the same reason spammers post innocent stuff before getting down and dirty - the creation of a plausibly innocent persona.
posted by L'Estrange Fruit at 2:33 PM on October 16, 2010
Why?
AT a guess, for the same reason spammers post innocent stuff before getting down and dirty - the creation of a plausibly innocent persona.
posted by L'Estrange Fruit at 2:33 PM on October 16, 2010
Is this the 27Ker who recently got self link banned? I was somewhat admiring his dedication.
I don't recall off-hand who that'd be, but no, I don't think there were any recent old-accounts-delurking sorts of thing super recently. And, honestly, it's not totally top secret stuff but it's also probably not anything that a public discussion of the details is going to improve any, so I'd be inclined to just forgo any further guessing-game stuff as far as the identity.
posted by cortex (staff) at 2:34 PM on October 16, 2010
I don't recall off-hand who that'd be, but no, I don't think there were any recent old-accounts-delurking sorts of thing super recently. And, honestly, it's not totally top secret stuff but it's also probably not anything that a public discussion of the details is going to improve any, so I'd be inclined to just forgo any further guessing-game stuff as far as the identity.
posted by cortex (staff) at 2:34 PM on October 16, 2010
Apropos of nothing, I love the Halloween animations on the "Post a new question" page. Delightfully un-Metafilter-ish, yet probably effective.
posted by John Cohen at 2:42 PM on October 16, 2010 [21 favorites]
posted by John Cohen at 2:42 PM on October 16, 2010 [21 favorites]
And sincere. Very, very sincere.
posted by maudlin at 2:46 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by maudlin at 2:46 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
Is this the 27Ker who recently got self link banned? I was somewhat admiring his dedication.
That may be the guy that cortex shot, as cjorgensen pointed out.
posted by mlis at 2:50 PM on October 16, 2010
That may be the guy that cortex shot, as cjorgensen pointed out.
posted by mlis at 2:50 PM on October 16, 2010
The question is, why Haubenstock-Ramati? What a truly obscure choice.
posted by fourcheesemac at 2:55 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by fourcheesemac at 2:55 PM on October 16, 2010
The user keeps trying to sneak back in - to post stuff like that lame-arsed crap?
We sort of feel that there's a performance art aspect to it, possibly. Agreed, it's super strange.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 3:53 PM on October 16, 2010
We sort of feel that there's a performance art aspect to it, possibly. Agreed, it's super strange.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 3:53 PM on October 16, 2010
Based on my own experience with people like this, some of it is sheer stubbornness.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 4:08 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 4:08 PM on October 16, 2010
Also a derail, but I'm so glad John Cohen pointed out those animations on the AskMe posting page. I rarely ask questions, so I could have missed those animations entirely --- and they're too adorable to miss! Mods, I love you.
posted by Elsa at 4:09 PM on October 16, 2010 [10 favorites]
posted by Elsa at 4:09 PM on October 16, 2010 [10 favorites]
Aw man, I can't see the animation for 4 days, 1 hours, 25 minutes, 35 seconds.
posted by amro at 4:14 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by amro at 4:14 PM on October 16, 2010
Animation 1, 2, 3.
Actually, they're 1, 2, 4; here's 3. Easter Egg!
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 4:34 PM on October 16, 2010 [4 favorites]
Actually, they're 1, 2, 4; here's 3. Easter Egg!
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 4:34 PM on October 16, 2010 [4 favorites]
to get away with this you'd need to coopt an user name that was ... completely anonymous.
posted by boo_radley at 4:38 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by boo_radley at 4:38 PM on October 16, 2010
Here's a smaller view of the unholy trio in context.
posted by maudlin at 4:39 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by maudlin at 4:39 PM on October 16, 2010
maudlin: "Here's a smaller view of the unholy trio in context."
Why was I expecting a video of Matt, Jessamyn and Cortex?
posted by Splunge at 4:46 PM on October 16, 2010 [5 favorites]
Why was I expecting a video of Matt, Jessamyn and Cortex?
posted by Splunge at 4:46 PM on October 16, 2010 [5 favorites]
posted by kittensofthenight to MetaFilter-Related at 3:56 PM
posted by Dasein at 3:59 PM on October 16 [+] [!]
3 minutes and that bone was cleaned.
follow the money, start in Vienna.
unless the art is the message or meaning.
posted by clavdivs at 5:03 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by Dasein at 3:59 PM on October 16 [+] [!]
3 minutes and that bone was cleaned.
follow the money, start in Vienna.
unless the art is the message or meaning.
posted by clavdivs at 5:03 PM on October 16, 2010
ethylene?
posted by amro at 5:06 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by amro at 5:06 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
...Really? He had Glycerine and Ethylene? Man loved his o-chem.
posted by maryr at 8:46 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by maryr at 8:46 PM on October 16, 2010
I've moderated forums in the past and had a couple of users sneak back in. One of them, I didn't mind and let it slide because she didn't exhibit the bad behavior that had gotten her banned anymore. She straightened out.
Another one kept coming back under different IPs, different emails, etc. and misbehaving. She gave me the standard (non)argument that it's a free Internet and I couldn't ban her when she didn't do anything wrong (the second time around) and I told her that she agreed to the forum rules, which stated that we could ban you for any reason at any time. Private forums that I (or mathowie) pay for with my (his) own money are not America and do not equal free speech.
I think some of them just get off on getting away with it, like "ha ha I'm here and they don't even know!"
posted by IndigoRain at 8:48 PM on October 16, 2010
Another one kept coming back under different IPs, different emails, etc. and misbehaving. She gave me the standard (non)argument that it's a free Internet and I couldn't ban her when she didn't do anything wrong (the second time around) and I told her that she agreed to the forum rules, which stated that we could ban you for any reason at any time. Private forums that I (or mathowie) pay for with my (his) own money are not America and do not equal free speech.
I think some of them just get off on getting away with it, like "ha ha I'm here and they don't even know!"
posted by IndigoRain at 8:48 PM on October 16, 2010
Okay, I feel bad now.
I, too, used to be somebody else, but I swear I am NOT sneaking back in to cause trouble for our intrepid (nice word, no?) moderators. Or for anyone else, for that matter.
Just wanted to get that off my chest.
What?
Oh, I used to be ColdChef. I thought that was obvious.
posted by Curious Artificer at 9:04 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
I, too, used to be somebody else, but I swear I am NOT sneaking back in to cause trouble for our intrepid (nice word, no?) moderators. Or for anyone else, for that matter.
Just wanted to get that off my chest.
What?
Oh, I used to be ColdChef. I thought that was obvious.
posted by Curious Artificer at 9:04 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
coldchef...
were is the monkey kept...
posted by clavdivs at 9:31 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
were is the monkey kept...
posted by clavdivs at 9:31 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
Here's a smaller view of the unholy trio in context.
What exactly is that thing in the middle? The other two are comically sinister, but the sexy legs grafted onto that tiny head in the middle are really disturbing. It's like something out of a Guillermo del Toro film.
posted by Dr. Zira at 10:15 PM on October 16, 2010
What exactly is that thing in the middle? The other two are comically sinister, but the sexy legs grafted onto that tiny head in the middle are really disturbing. It's like something out of a Guillermo del Toro film.
posted by Dr. Zira at 10:15 PM on October 16, 2010
One comment asking where the monkey is kept + the next (completely unrelated comment) made by Dr. Zira = easy laughs on a Sunday afternoon
posted by supercrayon at 10:53 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by supercrayon at 10:53 PM on October 16, 2010
I care, with every fiber of my being, audobon.
(what?)
posted by Joseph Gurl at 2:59 AM on October 17, 2010
(what?)
posted by Joseph Gurl at 2:59 AM on October 17, 2010
and now deleted threads about deleted threads have been deleted.
posted by clavdivs at 8:24 AM on October 17, 2010
posted by clavdivs at 8:24 AM on October 17, 2010
Out of curiousity, how did you know who was behind the post? The account used to purchase the ID? I looked at the whois info for the site he linked and his name was not the one who registered the domain.
posted by 8dot3 at 8:47 AM on October 17, 2010
posted by 8dot3 at 8:47 AM on October 17, 2010
Yeah, in this case it was an IP match that gave us the lead we needed. A couple other little details that came out of searching there clinched it. That said, me and Jessamyn were both looking at it askew before we ever turned anything up; the MO of underexplained posts to not-very-good websites featuring esoteric art or writing is a familiar enough one at this point that the welling sense of Oh Fuck Not This Guy Again preceded any hard evidence.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:07 AM on October 17, 2010 [4 favorites]
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:07 AM on October 17, 2010 [4 favorites]
Yeah it's really a shotgun google approach with every bit of information we have about the guy juxtaposed with every other piece we have. It's nothing secret while at the same time we don't want to lay it all out here on the presumption that the guy reads the site and will duly note whatever blew it for him this time and not do that next time.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:44 AM on October 17, 2010
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:44 AM on October 17, 2010
Metafilter: the welling sense of Oh Fuck Not This Guy Again preceded any hard evidence
posted by John Cohen at 11:11 AM on October 17, 2010 [7 favorites]
posted by John Cohen at 11:11 AM on October 17, 2010 [7 favorites]
*far too intimidated to speak up
posted by The Lady is a designer at 8:57 AM on October 18, 2010
posted by The Lady is a designer at 8:57 AM on October 18, 2010
I'm curious about what it takes to not be allowed back on, ever. Do people usually have to be banned a few times before you guys are just like, "OK, seriously, that's enough," or is there some really heinous crime that'll do it on the first time? Could a self-linker come back if they played nice and didn't do it again? And are there a lot of permaban-ees who try to sneak back in?
I'm still kind of bummed about the whole "not now, not ever" policy on some users. I had really hoped to see one or two of the more colorful ban-ees come back and try to play by the rules. Alas.
posted by Captain Cardanthian! at 1:39 PM on October 19, 2010
I'm still kind of bummed about the whole "not now, not ever" policy on some users. I had really hoped to see one or two of the more colorful ban-ees come back and try to play by the rules. Alas.
posted by Captain Cardanthian! at 1:39 PM on October 19, 2010
Well there are a few levels of this. Before we had the $5 fee, people could sneak back in easily because there was no approval [I think?] and no real way to know if someone was the same person. Now there's an approval process that happens where Matt at least sees the PayPal of all new accounts. People who got banned last time for being SEO jackasses usually don't get a second chance if we're paying attention. People who had some sort of "maybe they outgrew it" or "maybe they're on medication now" problem may get a second chance. There's almost never a third chance if the first two chances have been squandered. And once we've told people "seriously, find another web site, you're not going to be a member of this one" (something we've maybe told three or four users, ever) there's not going to be another chance.
Our experience has been, however, that the people who lobby the most aggressively to be let back in [or who try to sneak in by using family members' or friends' PayPal addresses] are generally just going to get up to the same old Not Okay shit. Often it's situations where they have a difference of opinion from the entire Mod Team about whether the way they choose to interact with the site is incredibly problematic. Often they have a really mixed reception with the userbase with some people loving them and some people hating them.
There have been a few exceptions to this, and one of our more problematic users from Back in the Day is now a happy contributing low profile user. So it does happen but it's definitely the exception and not the rule.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 2:08 PM on October 19, 2010
Our experience has been, however, that the people who lobby the most aggressively to be let back in [or who try to sneak in by using family members' or friends' PayPal addresses] are generally just going to get up to the same old Not Okay shit. Often it's situations where they have a difference of opinion from the entire Mod Team about whether the way they choose to interact with the site is incredibly problematic. Often they have a really mixed reception with the userbase with some people loving them and some people hating them.
There have been a few exceptions to this, and one of our more problematic users from Back in the Day is now a happy contributing low profile user. So it does happen but it's definitely the exception and not the rule.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 2:08 PM on October 19, 2010
Yeah! That guy is such a wanker for repeatedly sneaking in! I hate him.
posted by Authorized User at 7:07 AM on October 28, 2010
posted by Authorized User at 7:07 AM on October 28, 2010
The Brand New Day is only available for peope who are actually able to not be That Guy under their new username. Only some people are able to do this effectively.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:52 AM on October 28, 2010
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:52 AM on October 28, 2010
Only some people are able to do this effectively.
And some of us, realizing the value of true community and acceptance and support, struggle with ourselves every single day in order to ensure our continued belongingness. There must be balance between energy given and energy taken. Value is, and we must work towards pulling our own weight and putting our best foot forward each day. Thank you jessamyn (and and I deserved that, cortex)
posted by The Lady is a designer at 10:31 AM on October 28, 2010
And some of us, realizing the value of true community and acceptance and support, struggle with ourselves every single day in order to ensure our continued belongingness. There must be balance between energy given and energy taken. Value is, and we must work towards pulling our own weight and putting our best foot forward each day. Thank you jessamyn (and and I deserved that, cortex)
posted by The Lady is a designer at 10:31 AM on October 28, 2010
« Older Deleting a dissenting voice is not awesome. | Help me find an old post - things falling? Newer »
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
It's weird and fucked up and we're really, really tired of it, and I know it makes for a cryptic deletion reason but I don't really feel like exchanging any more email with the guy as long as I live so that was more or less the extent of the communication I felt like giving it.
The post itself is probably not connected to anything, which is why we didn't example out the links; it's not a self-link situation so much as a "no, you don't get to do this anymore, period" thing.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:01 PM on October 16, 2010 [4 favorites]