Mea Culpa. September 11, 2002 5:48 AM   Subscribe

I apologise in advance for my transgression. Methinks I may have gone a bit far...
posted by Smart Dalek to Etiquette/Policy at 5:48 AM (25 comments total)

Now we have people apologizing before being keelhauled in Me-Talk?


posted by mischief at 6:03 AM on September 11, 2002


The only transgression is this pointless post in MetaTalk. Maybe you could explain why you are so pissed off at yourself. No one seems to be upset about anything but you..
posted by y6y6y6 at 6:17 AM on September 11, 2002


y6, I wasn't angry, just courteous...

I figured I'd give a polite mea culpa in advance for the unecessary eyestrain anyone might've suffered. I know a few places where folks tend to get permamently banned for "crufting the forum" with leetspeak.

And still being new MeFi, I didn't want to incur the wrath of the Elder Statesmen by jamming 560+ bits of munged ascii on Matt's server.


posted by Smart Dalek at 6:33 AM on September 11, 2002


Though I gotta admit, it was fun doing it...
posted by Smart Dalek at 6:34 AM on September 11, 2002


Dalek(Smart): I figured I'd give a polite mea culpa in advance for the unecessary eyestrain anyone might've suffered.

"Elder Statesmen," do you see what you have wrought? This poor boy's afraid to spout a little Leet!

Once a MetaTalk thread has been established and the point has been discussed and done with, can we move on to total off-topic digression and goofiness? I mean, why should the thread be a waste? Things are too solemn for me today and I need a good goofiness fix.
posted by Shane at 6:38 AM on September 11, 2002


Smart Dalek - everything is tickety-boo. You could have just apologized in the thread if you felt so badly about your contribution, although I see nothing wrong with it myself. Don't beat yourself up over it - a lot us probably regret a thing or two that we've posted here.

Not directed towards you, but general observation: these needless MetaTalk threads just have to stop. Coming here and finding a thread less than 24 hours old in the archives already is frustrating. Wasn't there a once upon a time when Matt shut down MetaTalk for a week or two, or am I dreaming this up? I seem to recall it...there was a renewed sense of respect for it when he brought it back around. I wish he would do it again.

can we move on to total off-topic digression and goofiness?

Pick a thread, any thread. They all end like that.
posted by iconomy at 6:41 AM on September 11, 2002


Once a MetaTalk thread has been established and the point has been discussed and done with, can we move on to total off-topic digression and goofiness?

The suggestion that this place becomes a free-for-all chat room when a thread flatlines was not well-received.
posted by rcade at 6:48 AM on September 11, 2002


...was not well-received.

Yet it still happens constantly. But now I feel too self-conscious to willfully derail this thread (it usually happens spontaneously), or to start talking about that security guard in Rotterdam who ended up naked and painted orange. *Sigh...* Guess I'll get some work done.
posted by Shane at 7:03 AM on September 11, 2002


...was not well-received

Where there's Abbott...there's Costello.
posted by dangerman at 7:07 AM on September 11, 2002


Yet it still happens constantly.

That doesn't make it right. Be one of the good guys.
posted by frykitty at 7:07 AM on September 11, 2002


Be one of the good guys.

Because chicks dig the good guys.
posted by dangerman at 7:13 AM on September 11, 2002


am I wrong to worry when people start apologising for apologising for something that never needed apologising about anyway?
posted by gravelshoes at 7:41 AM on September 11, 2002


Dalek, I'm going to sue! My eyes strained and crossed and popped out of their sockets! I'll send the MeFi Mob after you, you ll/\m/\!
posted by SpecialK at 7:50 AM on September 11, 2002


I'll send the MeFi Mob after you, you ll/\m/\!

Hey, watch the unnecessary merriment! You bad guy ; ) Oh well, taxing the server isn't quite the issue it used to be, is it?
posted by Shane at 8:02 AM on September 11, 2002


Maybe you could explain why you are so pissed off at yourself. No one seems to be upset about anything but you..

perhaps some have missed the fact that most of the new users are walking on eggshells and filling meta with prepost, postpost, and wouldaposted crapola, and the fact that kneejerk meficops are responsible for that state of affairs? and are now bitching about it as if they had nuttin to do with it? (not referring to you specifically y6, your comment just provided a hook for me to hang this observation on.)
posted by quonsar at 8:54 AM on September 11, 2002


"Be one of the good guys.

Because chicks dig the good guys."


lies.
posted by jcterminal at 9:26 AM on September 11, 2002


I'd like to take this opportunity to apologise in advance for everything I haven't done yet, and may not even do...

Sorry for the sarcastic comment ; )
posted by Shane at 11:11 AM on September 11, 2002


the fact that kneejerk meficops are responsible for that state of affairs?

Are you suggesting that MeTa wouldn't currently be overflowing with posts caused by the large influx of new users if . . . if . . . what are you saying again, quonsar?
posted by mediareport at 1:37 PM on September 11, 2002


i believe the argument is "if they weren't so terrified of being dragged in there by one of the oversensitive mefi cops". not that i necessarily agree, but i think quonsar's made a point worth thinking about.
posted by pikachulolita at 2:01 PM on September 11, 2002


"if they weren't so terrified of being dragged in there by one of the oversensitive mefi cops".

It's also the atmosphere in MetaTalk in general: Is it okay to tell some jokes at the end of a thread? Is it self-linking if you do this..? Is it a mortal sin to use a damn (br) in a post? Did those folks have a good reason to derail that guys comment thread by questioning his posting etiquette, or do they just love to do that anyway? Am I an ass if I don't use spellcheck? Am I an ass if I suggest someone else should use spellcheck? Am I going to MeFi hell if I use too much LEET?!

F***. There's more controversy in MetaTalk than on the front page. It's just of a more soap-opera-ish quality.

Hopefully newbies who watch for long enough figure out that there is a healthy middle ground between justified crimes-against-MeFi and plain old anal pickiness...
posted by Shane at 2:31 PM on September 11, 2002


A quick look over the posts reveals that when people are taken to meta, most of the time it's for one of three things:

1. Double post
2. Self-link
3. Being an utter jackass

The third has to be egregious to end up here.

Other discussions do come up within threads, but overall I think folks are reasonably circumspect (at least lately) in their use of meta. In my opinion, the paranoia does not seem justified.

Yeah, it's an intimidating place. Yeah, the bar is high. Hang around for a while, then learn by doing.
posted by frykitty at 2:39 PM on September 11, 2002


(...by the way, welcome back to active duty, kryfitty! S'been a while.)
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:22 PM on September 11, 2002


(...by the way, welcome back to active duty, kryfitty! S'been a while.)

**Smooch!**
posted by frykitty at 3:25 PM on September 11, 2002


i think quonsar's made a point worth thinking about

You're right. But here's the alternative point I was trying (perhaps badly) to make: I'm not so sure we wouldn't be having lots of folks "filling MeTa with...crapola" if the folks who've been accused of being "oversensitive mefi cops" would have sat on their hands during the last month.
posted by mediareport at 3:49 PM on September 11, 2002


if they weren't so terrified of being dragged in there by one of the oversensitive mefi cops

I disagree, what you're saying is that people are so scared of being taken to meta, they take themselves to meta 1) to be yelled at for the perceived "transgression" and additionally 2) to be yelled at for posting it to meta when no one else cared enough to. I think what is more likely is that people like attention, and they would like to think that what they have done is so bad, and so notable that it needs to be discussed. I don't think this is really a problem though. People will realize that it isn't really what metatalk is for, and hopefully that the whole membership honestly doesn't care for stuff that trivial and harmless.
posted by rhyax at 6:35 PM on September 11, 2002


« Older Just one 9/11 thread?   |   Closed thread means not-a-double policy Newer »

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