A litterbox for pooflinging

April 27, 2002 10:48 AM

Groan. Please. Stop.

Maybe we can set up a litterbox someplace where the concerned parties can fling the usual turds at each other till their batteries run down. These FPPs don't even seem to be conducive to discussion anymore. Agree to disagree already.
posted by artifex to MetaFilter-Related at 10:48 AM (30 comments total)

All together now: Here . . . comes a-NOTHER one!
posted by mcwetboy at 11:01 AM on April 27, 2002

Heeere it comes agaaaaiin...
posted by dchase at 11:06 AM on April 27, 2002

You know how Slashdot charges for no ads, how about MetaFilter offers a Israel/Palestine free option. That's got to be worth $50 a year ;-)
posted by RobertLoch at 11:14 AM on April 27, 2002

In my defence, I was hoping that my post might spark a bit of interesting debate, as the story was quite different from the usual "[Israel/Palestine] does something bad; isn't [Israel/Palestine] awful?" thread. It was supposed to be less about I/P, and more about whether people thought the students were being brave/stupid/both/whatever. Apologies if that failed to come across.

Anyway, I guess I was wrong. Feel free to delete in the interests of keeping MeFi I/P-free.
posted by chrismear at 11:22 AM on April 27, 2002

We didn't see no stinkin airplanes!
Get those peacenik sudents outta here!

(Image courtesy Walton Feed Preparedness Hints.)

posted by sheauga at 11:28 AM on April 27, 2002

Quite tragically, the ad-hominem debates on MeFi seem to mirror the tit-for-tat nature of the Israel/Palestine conflict... but that doesn't mean these issues shouldn't be discussed.

Just as September 11th was and is an issue of tremendous importance for world politics, garnering a huge amount of coverage on MeFi as a result, so the Israel/Palestine war will naturally become one of the major recurring themes on this site.

Let's not try and ignore these issues, though. Just because the tragedy is no longer on American soil doesn't mean that somehow Metafilter is above it. This is the defining political struggle of this year, it *is* a matter we should all care deeply about, and it is something that we should be discussing with our fellow humans.
posted by skylar at 11:37 AM on April 27, 2002

agreed. it would be sad if these kinds of things couldn't be discussed. btw, i didn't think it was unclear that the post was meant as a springboard for discussion. i'm assuming that adnanbwp is banned. if not, i would like to know why not? flaming doesn't get any worse than that.
posted by xammerboy at 11:44 AM on April 27, 2002

flaming doesn't get any worse than that.

Than what? I only saw one comment by adnan in those threads, and it was provocative for sure, but not a flame. Can you elaborate?
posted by rodii at 11:51 AM on April 27, 2002

I thought Adnan's comment was offensive too, but I think he was being sarcastic. It wasn't a flame.
posted by donkeyschlong at 11:53 AM on April 27, 2002

I tried a little while ago to get some discussion going over this subject. I phrased my post in a non-aggressive way, using words that would hopefully encourage talk, rather than the bitter sermonizing and rants that we are all familiar with.

Maybe my intentions were misunderstood, or I didn't phrase the post well enough, but the first comment in the thread occurred 6 hours later, to the tune of "who gives a crap". The "discussion" went downhill from there.

Frankly, I don't think that it can be discussed in a public forum without an immediate taking of sides. Maybe the worst offenders should start a yahoo group such as this one and do it from there.
posted by ashbury at 11:58 AM on April 27, 2002

I don't believe there to be a persuasive centrist, or non-partisan, position with the Middle East. The saying, "You have to ask for a mile to get an inch" definitely rings true here. Here we have two diametric positions trying to get that inch, and I've yet to see any major success. When I asked for the voluntary moratorium, I was hoping that we, as a community, could instill some sort of moderation. MeFi cannot ban this subject because this is an important period in our history as a society. OTOH, surely we can choose our posts and words more carefully, if only to take the high road.
posted by BlueTrain at 12:15 PM on April 27, 2002

oh come ON!

it's turning into a fucking multi-user warblog!

/me prays to matt to end the madness!

posted by jcterminal at 12:24 PM on April 27, 2002

Though I think there are too many I/P threads, and I wish they wouldn't descend into personal invective, I continue to often find the discussion enlightening. Well-articulated positions on either side, with views that gradually change as new arguments/developments accrue...

There's also a bunch of inflexible, mud-slinging jerks, but they're present political threads of all sorts, and one can (and does) ignore them.

The suggestion made in BlueTrain moratorium thread - that I/P discussion get piled into one thread a day (at most) - is a good one. But the constant in-thread bitching (by those who are sick of the discussion) doesn't help anything. Knock it off, all of ya.
posted by Marquis at 3:57 PM on April 27, 2002

I thought adnan was making a sarcastic remark about a touchy situation, and a few people read it as serious.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 4:23 PM on April 27, 2002

What skylar said. The solution here is to raise the level of discussion that we expect. Those who engage in personal attacks should be ostracized. Those whose comments are thoughtful and detailed should be praised, even if they express an unpopular opinion.
posted by gd779 at 4:29 PM on April 27, 2002

"Those who engage in personal attacks should be ostracized. Those whose comments are thoughtful and detailed should be praised, even if they express an unpopular opinion."

what if the personal attack is thoughtful and detailed?
posted by jcterminal at 4:58 PM on April 27, 2002

It was either sarcasm or trolling, but it wasn't a flame. My guess is that is was just an attempt at sarcasm that just didn't go over very well.
posted by Gary at 5:07 PM on April 27, 2002

what if the personal attack is thoughtful and detailed?

There's no such thing. If a person is being truly thoughtful about an issue, he or she won't feel compelled to resort to personal attacks.

Anything less is just window dressing. A jerk is a jerk, no matter how he dresses himself up. And so is an idiot. MetaFilter should stop tolerating both.

(Fortunately, there seems to be a rather high correlation between acid incivility and idiocy, both on MetaFilter and in the real world. Unfortunately, this particular brand of idiot often erroneously thinks of himself as intelligent.)
posted by gd779 at 5:48 PM on April 27, 2002

"This is the defining political struggle of this year". I have bad news for you; there are eight months left in this year, plenty of time for something worse to knock this off of page one.
posted by Mack Twain at 8:47 PM on April 27, 2002

If you don't like I/P threads, just don't read those threads. It works!

There's plenty of other threads out there. Read and put your two cents in on those. Of course, if this supposed "problem" just went away on its own, what would people have to bitch about on MetaTalk?!?


posted by mark13 at 9:13 PM on April 27, 2002

I'm sorry, I didn't want to come back to this thread, nor did I want to read another Middle East piss party, but surely, SURELY this cannot be tolerated:

Indymedia got the tone about right: "Gunmen kill three Israeli land thieves, plus one future land thief." - boaz

For all of you that don't want to click the link, the "future land thief" was a 5 year old girl. I am disgusted...appalled, fuck, I don't have enough heinous adjectives to fit my rage right now. This is too much. I demand peace in MeFi, as an example for those in the Middle East. I understand I'm one of 14,000, but I will ask again, for the sake of civility and humanity, enough with the Middle East threads until some rational, thought-provoking comments can be found.

She was 5...damnit. She barely had a chance to see the world, and here we are, arrogant fuckers, telling them how to live their lives. How one side is better than the other. We live sheltered lives, most of us anyway. 9/11 was a wake-up call, and here we are, dictating, instead of learning or understanding. What does it take? Honestly, are our egos that precious? Is our pride that important? Enough already...
posted by BlueTrain at 9:18 PM on April 27, 2002

dear artifex and friends,

get the hell over it.

I can only be thankful that y'all don't raise issue with every sort of post (be it about sports, celebrities, or musicians, all the kinds of posts I don't particularly care to read) you don't particularly care to read.
posted by mcsweetie at 9:20 PM on April 27, 2002

"What does it take?"


the best question so far. I said it last week, said it for a year. It will take some Palestinean kid to unhitch his satchel, approach a check point and say. "here, i dont want to kill or better yet i dont want to die" (funny, a few days later, drudge had some story about a bomber doing something similar-like arafat didnt send me or something) so, the kid gives up. say, the solders shoot him dead. then who is righteous? Perhaps it wont take just one or even 5 kids. (as this scenrio could be used as a rouse) It will take many to stop (even a halt) this morass. Thats what Arafat should do, send out wave after wave of I-wanna-live-non-bombers. I am moved by what Bluetrain said. But these terrorists do not want peace. (not saying all PALS are terrorists) History has basically proven that a conflict this deep an ancient can only be resolved internally if the lest damaging result is desired.
posted by clavdivs at 9:49 PM on April 27, 2002

Thanks for following your own example, mcsweaty.
posted by donkeyschlong at 10:16 PM on April 27, 2002

"There's no such thing. If a person is being truly thoughtful about an issue, he or she won't feel compelled to resort to personal attacks."

no, i was talking about the *personal attacks* being thoughtful and detailed. sheesh.

i *know* i can come up with such an animal. ask my mom. i hit that thing like a chicken wing.
posted by jcterminal at 10:18 PM on April 27, 2002

For all of you that don't want to click the link, the "future land thief" was a 5 year old girl. I am disgusted...

Which, honestly, is the same rationale used when labelling Palestinian childern "future suicide bombers". Pot kettle black, kettle pot black, in a sense.
posted by nathan_teske at 12:07 AM on April 28, 2002

For all of you that don't want to click the link, the "future land thief" was a 5 year old girl. I am disgusted...appalled, fuck, I don't have enough heinous adjectives to fit my rage right now.

Just to clarify, I posted that because I was appalled and disgusted by it, not because I supported it.
posted by boaz at 5:45 AM on April 28, 2002

It's obviously my fault these threads are what they are.
posted by ParisParamus at 8:59 AM on April 28, 2002

shalom paris.
posted by clavdivs at 9:16 AM on April 28, 2002

boaz-
"nothings more foolish then a man chasing his own hat"

-from 'Millers Crossing'
posted by clavdivs at 9:18 AM on April 28, 2002