GYOBFW

October 30, 2002 5:29 AM

The lovely and talented JonnyX says: MCWETBOY-------------so go play on your own blog then you dipshit. if you dont like it here then FUCK OFF.

In a word, "no".
posted by mcwetboy to etiquette/policy at 5:29 AM (110 comments total)

Oh, great MetaFilter discussion, fuckwits.

Contrition is not your strong point.
posted by machaus at 5:35 AM on October 30, 2002

The context:

JonnyX didn't take well, I guess, to my complaint about this post -- I felt that Mark Steyn's right-wing gadfly role at the Post meant that posting one of his columns was inevitably flamebait, and the discussion on this thread did not disappoint. I thought the post was weak and the discussion was lame and predictable. JonnyX didn't have to agree with me, but he sure as hell didn't have to spew shit from his mouth, either.

I'll put my contributions to this site against JonnyX's any day.
posted by mcwetboy at 5:36 AM on October 30, 2002

Contrition is not your strong point.

Like I didn't have a point. Or would you rather that the flamers and trollers have their own little playground on this site, like the -1 underbelly at Slashdot?
posted by mcwetboy at 5:37 AM on October 30, 2002

Um, this all looks about plain and normal to me, for a post like "Stop making excuses for Muslim Extremists."

I don't go near threads like that. Don't we all know what to expect when the can is clearly labelled "Worms"?
posted by Shane at 5:49 AM on October 30, 2002

Like I didn't have a point.

Crapping on a crap post and then opening a thread here when flamed isn't productive. Open a constructive post here, or move on.
posted by machaus at 6:05 AM on October 30, 2002

If Steve_at_Linwood had a point -- and Matt seems to think that he did -- then I think I have a point here. There is such a thing as degree.

Also, I wasn't solely crapping on the post. I was providing some background on Steyn -- I do read that newspaper, you know -- and pointing out that his columns are grist for flamewars, but little more than that. Not that I was gentle, but, shit, man, that was already par for the course in that thread. I was targeted because I wasn't playing by warblogger-approved rules. What you (machaus) and Shane are saying is that little boy shouldn't play with matches. Nice.
posted by mcwetboy at 6:17 AM on October 30, 2002

What is the story with all the "------------------------" in posts?
posted by Mid at 6:23 AM on October 30, 2002

...saying is that little boy shouldn't play with matches.

I'm just saying "What's the point?" Does anyone really think a post like this will be result in a mature, polite discussion that won't devolve into crap-flinging? Is it even possible that the thread will go like this:

Non-Flamer #1: "You know, I feel that society and the media have gone easy on Muslim extremists since 9/11, excusing or ignoring their behavior and turning a blind eye to the problem of religious fundamentalism."

Non-Flamer #2: "Wait, there, I disagree with you. I think that, if anything, the media has called attention to Muslim extremism at every opportunity, and society, especially American society, is and was already dangerously biased against this part of the world community..."

Non-Flamer #1: "Okay, but let me make this point about the Muslims and the Press..."

No chance! No way. The thread is hellbound from the moment it starts.
posted by Shane at 6:41 AM on October 30, 2002

I see your point, Shane, thank you. My question, then, is, should these threads should be tolerated? I'm not sure that "stay away" should be proper procedure around here, unless Matt devises a skull-and-crossbones icon to designate no-go areas (abandon all hope) like that.

Seriously, what do we do about posts like this? Ignoring them is tacit consent. Complaining in-thread treats you to verbal abuse. Quitting the playground -- as JonnyX seems to want me to do -- leaves the cretins in charge. What is to be done?
posted by mcwetboy at 6:47 AM on October 30, 2002

What is to be done?

I don't know, man, I guess that's why I stay away. And sometimes I can't resist and I bite the hook even though I know the other person is baiting me. Sometimes you just can't stand to see something said without opposition.

Sometimes you can play the game right, use polite statements and facts till the other person (if they're trolling) exposes him/herself as a troll by losing it.

I'm no angel, though. I still get pissed and go off myself sometimes. We all do. I guess it's a constant battle. Feel free to throw this back at me the next time I lose it.

posted by Shane at 6:59 AM on October 30, 2002

Ignoring them is the perfect solution. Stay out of these threads and you are 98% less likely to be called a fuckwit. If you don't want to be called a fuckwit, that's really your only option.
Ignoring a post is does not mean you consent to the viewpoint it expresses. This thinking will get you in trouble. It means you are easy to bait. You are not obliged to respond to every dim-witted post about arabs, Hitler, abortion, or Bush.
Shane is right. Just stay away from these threads--you will become a happier person.
posted by Fabulon7 at 7:08 AM on October 30, 2002

mcwetboy: Seriously, what do we do about posts like this?

It seems our only option is to try and overlook them. Orange may not be the new orange any more, but Steve_at_Linwood and hama7 are the new Postroad and ParisParamus, so whenever you see their names, just click the Back button your browser and get on with your day. I'm arguably more conservative than either one of them, but once that little tagteam sinks their puppy teeth into a thread, there's usually no going back.

None of this is to excuse JonnyX's cretinous reply to you, but that's the sort of turd that's going to hit the walls in these threads (nor does it really excuse you calling them fuckwits, but I certainly see your point). If you haven't already, try webmutant's remixed version of MetaFilter. As it's shaping up, this kind of crud will seldom if ever appear there.
posted by JollyWanker at 7:17 AM on October 30, 2002

Ignoring them is the perfect solution.

Is it? Or will simply ignoring it and moving on going to give consent to these people to keep crapping on MetaFilter like this? Basically what we have here are people posting obviously biased opinion columns to start flame-wars. They do it on an almost daily basis. They like to sit around and have the same yelling and pissing match over and over and over. Then they retreat for a while for sleep, kool-aid, and graham crackers and then start all over again.

It's been said dozens of times lately, MeFi is not a discussion board. Posting something just to get a rise out of people and laugh is not appropriate behavior here. Ignoring it will simply allow it to continue. Calling it what it is and at least voicing a little bit of dissent is necessary if we ever hope to put an end to these endless tirades.

Threads like this are, as far as I know, and I've seen, NOT what Matt wants for this site. I'm also willing to bet that it's not what the vast majority of members want for this site. Therefore, they should not be permitted to exist on this site. Period.
posted by Ufez Jones at 7:23 AM on October 30, 2002

Then they retreat for a while for sleep, kool-aid, and graham crackers and then start all over again.

Listen, Fuckwit, I like Kool-Aid and graham crackers. I'll see you in MeTa.

; )
posted by Shane at 7:33 AM on October 30, 2002

I agree with most of that. I meant it was the perfect solution to avoid entering a situation where you will get angry and be called names. I don't think ignoring it will make it stop. That's a whole other discussion.

That being said, I don't see any point in jumping into these threads and starting to yell at these people. These types of posts encourage that. They thrive on it. They seem to be full of people hiding in the bushes, waiting to fight. I don't want to fight, so I avoid them.

I would like to see a place where there were no jackasses trying to taunt one another into fits of insult-spewing, but I don't think fighting with them in these kinds of threads will accomplish that.

So, I guess I am saying that to ignore a thread is perfect solution for the individual who doesn't want to get burned, but it is not a solution to the issue as a whole.


posted by Fabulon7 at 7:37 AM on October 30, 2002

But but but.... I haven't been convinced yet that the war on Iraq is bad! I am in sore need of daily ideological rants cleverly disguised as relevant op-ed posts.

War... bad? Bush... stupid? Oh I don't know! Metafilter please hope me!
posted by Stan Chin at 7:39 AM on October 30, 2002

Don't fight fire with fire.
posted by margaretlam at 7:39 AM on October 30, 2002

That clarified things well, fabulon7, thank you. There does seem to be periodic sacrifices by some members to try to go in to threads like that and acheive some semblance of order, but usually it's just like throwing a lamb to the wolves, and they often get what mcwetboy got today. That's their own choice. Personally, I wouldn't do it, but I'm not going to slag on them for doing it either. I do think mcwetboy could've done it in a little better way, but I'm not convinced the reaction would have been any different.
posted by Ufez Jones at 7:42 AM on October 30, 2002

I wonder when I get to see all this reasoned discourse this place is supposed to be famous for.

Or do we pay extra for that ? ;-)

In all seriousness, I think mcwetboy had a perfect right to call this person out, as I thought that was what metatalk was for. I mean, it has to be for something, or what is the point of having it at all? Metatalk, that is.


posted by konolia at 7:52 AM on October 30, 2002

MetaTalk is for MiguelCardoso to ask random questions. (I'm kidding. Don't punch me, Miguel.)
posted by Fabulon7 at 8:02 AM on October 30, 2002

I wonder when I get to see all this reasoned discourse this place is supposed to be famous for.
This thread is working out to be civil and constructive... Woo hoo!
posted by Shane at 8:04 AM on October 30, 2002

There is only one way to take care of this issue: a zero tolerance policy on any sort of abuse. If somebody starts mouthing off they should have their comments removed and/or edited. Unfortunately, this would include statements such as "Oh, great MetaFilter discussion, fuckwits."

Of course, the problem with this approach is that there is a fine line between censorship and freedom of expression.

Rushmc has mentioned more than once (too lazy to find the meta threads) that there is no reason or excuse to behave in such a manner nor to use these words. While I feel that there are times that it feels good to do it, he is, in essence, right.

Ignoring the behaviour is one thing, but it does nothing towards stopping it. Perhaps the answer lies in more work for Matt--sending personal messages to users that aren't in the thread, either via email or some sort of built in to Mefi IM program. (the Instant Message idea would work better since that would guarantee that the users would be online and getting their messages). Either way, I don't think Matt wants to do this, for obvious reasons, and nor should he have to.

However, as Matt is the only one with the deletion ability, it would be up to him to enforce a no tolerance policy.

Why is it that so many things rest on Matt's shoulders? Don't answer that, it's rhetorical.
posted by ashbury at 8:04 AM on October 30, 2002

Metafilter - Our members aren't mature enough to discuss controversion topics.

Alternatively - Why think when you can flame?
posted by revbrian at 8:07 AM on October 30, 2002

mcwetboy: I don't particularly appreciate being called a fuckwit on MeFi but what the hell. I nearly posted [in the original thread] something along the lines of 'you're right but no need to be so cranky' but thought better of it...

If you'd have been a tad more civil, you probably wouldn't have got the response you did. Which, BTW, doesn't excuse it...
posted by i_cola at 8:20 AM on October 30, 2002

whatever you do, whatever you say I know its alright.
posted by johnnyboy at 8:21 AM on October 30, 2002

but Steve_at_Linwood and hama7 are the new Postroad and ParisParamus

Excuse me? The discussion was quite civil till mcwetboy showed up with this the post being discusssd here. Don't drag me into the mud. I wasn't the one who started calling people fuckwits.
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 8:32 AM on October 30, 2002

'I was targeted because I......."

"Targeted"??? Please get over yourself. Shane is right. Going into that thread is just asking for trouble. Maybe that's a sad testament. But it seems obvious.

'What is to be done?"

Stop whining? Ignore the trolls?

This sort of post is going to happen and people are going to jump all over it. It's a hot topic. Nothing is to be done. It's fine. Try not to take comments from people who've never met you so damn seriously.

'I thought that was what metatalk was for."

Oh yes. Metatalk is for chronicling ever single flame in the MetaFilter threads. How productive. I suggest a new category - "I Got My Feewings Hurt"

Sure, JonnyX is being a boob. But unless you want his account pulled (and I can't see how that's justified) why the hell pull us into your little soap opera? Polite discussion is nice, but you're not always going to get it. Right?
posted by y6y6y6 at 8:38 AM on October 30, 2002

mcwetboy: you started the name calling with your comment. You seem to be saying above that the fact that the post linked to a right-wing op-ed piece excused your behaviour. I disagree.

I think all op-ed links, right or left, are flame bait but they are very common. I recommend ignoring them all, but if you do participate you should play nicely.
posted by timeistight at 8:42 AM on October 30, 2002

Metafilter: where the rules are changed more than a baby's diaper
posted by konolia at 8:52 AM on October 30, 2002

How about we get a filter on all the bad words; that makes flaming harder, plus we'll end up with some more interesting insults as people try to get around the filters. Something along the lines of "flaming nasal mucous discharge pointed in your general direction". No?
posted by blue_beetle at 9:08 AM on October 30, 2002

I just looked at the Front Page, do you mind if I rest here on my cycle...........
posted by thomcatspike at 9:19 AM on October 30, 2002

After months of this junk, I've realized a few things.

Metafilter does politics, religion, and other hot-button issues poorly. It's supposed to filter the web for interesting bits, which it does largely well, but when things veer into this territory, things go wrong more often than not.

There are several reasons for this, and much of it has to do with the role that emotion plays in these debates. People get way too involved too quickly, say things they don't take time to think about, and once someone flies off the handle, the whole thread is shit. These sorts of subjects also have a deep polarizing effect on the membership. If I post a link to an amazing lego site, we're not instantly split into pro- and anti-lego building blocks. Heated arguments don't take place about the author ignoring erector sets when speaking of lego. A polarizing thread quickly turns south as people bicker the points of "us vs. them" and quickly becomes fruitless. Heated, polarized discussions rarely, if ever, convert anyone to your point of view and frequently reduce the understanding of your peers who might be on the opposite end of your viewpoint.

That said, a few other observations.

Kaslo's two posts are garbage. The first one, in which he wanted to make a point, he grabbed a single story to support his view that there's some sort of vast conspiracy to keep muslims from seeming evil in the press, which was refuted by many and proven largely untrue. The second post, that prompted this metatalk post does a couple more bad things. There's a link to an op-ed. I've already covered why op-eds make for shitty posts to MetaFilter. In the absence of any evidence or any supporting links, it's just one journalist's view vs. everyone else, which often leads to pointless threads that go nowhere. The op-ed in question also happens to be by Mark Steyn, who according to his string of articles seems to believe that islam is a religion of hate, all muslims want to kill americans, and that the religion needs to be removed from the earth. His stuff has come up a few times before on MetaFilter with similarly disasterous results. He finds a miniscule point in some news story, then clumsily blossoms it into a full article that supports his thesis. People frequently find fault with his articles, so called "fact checking his ass" (being a member of the Nation Of Islam makes you connected to the Al-Queda? Does being a Baptist link you Catholic Preists that molested children?) but that usually gets lost in the mess these threads leave.

MetaFilter isn't the place to advance your political viewpoint because again, the site doesn't do politics particularly well. While Kaslo said his point in posting it was this:

That's the whole point of this forum - to introduce news items of interest that the participants can discuss intelligently and respectfully. I'm new to Metafilter and I guess you guys are the self-annoited bullies of this annoyingly PC mefi schoolyard.

It seems he's gotten off on the wrong foot in thinking the point of MetaFilter was to discuss news items in the first place. Intelligent, respectful discussions will not come from op-ed screeds. i_cola got it right: indymedia (from the left) and Coulter & Steyn (on the right) are often the source of inflammatory articles and editorializing your posts while also referring to everyone with the same brush as "self-annoited bullies of this annoyingly PC mefi schoolyard" isn't going to get you very far, or contribute to creating an intelligent and respectful tone that you would expect.
posted by mathowie at 10:03 AM on October 30, 2002

Steve_at_Linwood: Don't drag me into the mud.

My comment had nothing to do with this specific incident's naughty words. I was merely observing that the presence of yourself and/or your compatriot, hama7, seems to be a leading indicator - as the presence of Postroad and ParisParamus are leading indicators - that a thread is going to go south. I don't know and I don't care why. Take it any way you want to, it was merely a simple, anectdotal observation, shared with mcwetboy as a way of helping him better manage reading MetaFilter.
posted by JollyWanker at 10:05 AM on October 30, 2002

"MetaFilter isn't the place to advance your political viewpoint"

Can we make that a rule? Pretty please? Adding this to the guidelines might make things so much better here.
posted by y6y6y6 at 10:28 AM on October 30, 2002

Mcwetboy-----------------------as you can see trying to insult people on a blog doenst work. do you really think people have nothing better to do in their lives than read this crap? I'm sure we have a lot in common, another life maybe!
posted by JonnyX at 10:29 AM on October 30, 2002

Jonny, you've actually got most of the place agreeing with you (or at least sympathetic.) Don't mess that up with more pointless personal attacks, eh?
posted by Yelling At Nothing at 10:47 AM on October 30, 2002

Mcwetboy - as you can see trying to insult people on a blog doenst work

A) What you said "MCWETBOY-------------so go play on your own blog then you dipshit. if you dont like it here then FUCK OFF." wasn't an insult.
B) It didn't work because this isn't mcwetboy's blog.
C) You're confused.

I think C is the correct answer. I win the pony.




posted by ginz at 10:48 AM on October 30, 2002

JonnyX, you aren't helping matters.

MetaFilter isn't the place to advance your political viewpoint because again, the site doesn't do politics particularly well.
Fifty-foot letters of fire please. I would add that plenty of us don't care to discuss politics here, either.

Metafilter: more "gee whiz," less "fuck off"
posted by whatnot at 10:48 AM on October 30, 2002

MetaFilter: Not the place to advance your political viewpoint.
MetaFilter: We do hot-button issues poorly.
posted by timeistight at 10:49 AM on October 30, 2002

Regarding the sentiment that my original post started the name calling, with the conclusion that I had it coming to me as a result:

There is a difference between calling everybody a fuckwit -- the Official Tongue-in-Cheek Insult of MetaFilter^TM, with at least some sarcastic overtones -- and insulting one person specifically. "Oh, great MetaFilter discussion, fuckwits" is nowhere near as strong as "so go play on your own blog then you dipshit. if you dont like it here then FUCK OFF".

Do you see? It's the difference between "jeez, you people are shitheads" (general, somewhat strong) and "you personally are a shithead and a retard and a waste of skin and you smell" (specific, stronger). It's the difference between taking a general comment personally and taking a personal comment personally. ("People are stupid." "How dare you call me stupid!")

And dammit, it hurt. Or couldn't you tell? And JonnyX's incoherent little comment above doesn't inspire me to think that this anonymous little fucker is likely to change his ways any time soon.
posted by mcwetboy at 10:54 AM on October 30, 2002

JonnyX and mxwetboy: go to your rooms and and don't come out until you can stop name calling.

Where is your mother when we need her?
posted by timeistight at 10:59 AM on October 30, 2002

I pledge that am not ever going to get involved in any thread containing posts with more than five or six continuous hypens.
posted by Fabulon7 at 11:01 AM on October 30, 2002

I think its time we all acted our age, dont you think?
Mcwetboy, Im very sorry for insulting you, I dont take very kindly to being called a fuckwit, so you see I had to retort. If this little episode has caused you grief then I am very sorry.
Please feel free to get on with your reptile hunting in the knowledge that everyone here respects being called a fuckwit.
As I said earlier, Im sure you and I would get along like a house on fire if we cut out the this mud slinging event.

have we finished now?

can we all got to bed now?

oh please Im tried!
posted by JonnyX at 11:05 AM on October 30, 2002

gee-wiz i sould learn how use that spell-checker!
posted by JonnyX at 11:06 AM on October 30, 2002

Maybe we could just equate continuous hyphens with Godwin?

I dont take very kindly to being called a fuckwit, so you see I had to retort

No, you didn't. If you think someone is trolling, or don't think their comments are deserving of an intelligent response, just don't respond! Believe it or not, no one will think less of you, and we'll avoid this whole mess in the future.


posted by Yelling At Nothing at 11:10 AM on October 30, 2002

Official Tongue-in-Cheek Insult of MetaFilterTM, with at least some sarcastic overtones

Sarcasm is just an excuse to say rude things.
posted by Dark Messiah at 11:15 AM on October 30, 2002

Metafilter: Who you calling fuckwit, you fuckwit?
posted by UnReality at 11:18 AM on October 30, 2002

No, you didn't. If you think someone is trolling, or don't think their comments are deserving of an intelligent response, just don't respond!

look, I can cut-and-paste too

ENOUGH ALREADY!
posted by JonnyX at 11:18 AM on October 30, 2002

Dude, that was an attempt to be helpful. You're not supposed to be mean to people who are trying to be helpful. It's not nice.
posted by Fabulon7 at 11:26 AM on October 30, 2002

Enough it is. Time for bed, JonnyX.
posted by your mother at 11:32 AM on October 30, 2002

Im sure I can live with it.
posted by JonnyX at 11:32 AM on October 30, 2002

Im sure I can live with it.

I like you. You make me seem sociable. (Seem.)
posted by Dark Messiah at 11:56 AM on October 30, 2002

Metafilter: -------------------------------.


posted by elwoodwiles at 12:16 PM on October 30, 2002

Jonny, you don't have an email posted, or I'd go ahead and take this there. Of course, if you'd rather act as you have been than actually, maybe, possibly accept a little constructive criticism, then I probably don't want to.
posted by Yelling At Nothing at 12:17 PM on October 30, 2002

Metatalk: Fighting Fire with Shit.
posted by Samsonov14 at 12:24 PM on October 30, 2002

Jonny, you don't have an email posted...

Oh, you're just Yelling At Nothing...

Get it?
Man, this thread is tapped out. Not even any good jokes left.
posted by Shane at 12:28 PM on October 30, 2002

Metafilter: Instantly split into pro- and anti-lego building blocks.
[/misquote]
posted by eddydamascene at 12:33 PM on October 30, 2002

Screw you and your Legos. Be a man and play with an erection set. [/misquote]
posted by Shane at 12:35 PM on October 30, 2002

It seems our only option is to try and overlook them. Orange may not be the new orange any more, but Steve_at_Linwood and hama7 are the new Postroad and ParisParamus, so whenever you see their names, just click the Back button your browser and get on with your day.

Yes, by all means, try to ignore other viewpoints. Oh my God, we have conservatives at the gates! I've been reading Mefi close to a year, and posting only a month, but by far, the first to make a snarky comment are usually liberals, responding to a conservative front page post, that they don't like.

posted by Beholder at 12:37 PM on October 30, 2002

Boo-hoo. Poor mcwetboy is upset because someone called him out for being an asshole. Guess what -- this is a place where a *variety* of *viewpoints* are discussed. You may think Mark Steyn is "flamebait", but I think he's an opinionated guy whose articles often lead to interesting discussions. If you've got something intelligent to add to the debate, go right ahead. Otherwise, shut your mouth and move on. Crybaby.
posted by Polo Mr. Polo at 12:48 PM on October 30, 2002

MetaFilter: gee-wiz i sould learn how use that spell-checker!

True dat.
posted by UKnowForKids at 12:48 PM on October 30, 2002

Polo Mr. Polo, that was uncalled for. Why are all the aggressive little fucks the ones who don't post their real names and e-mail addresses? You, sir, are a coward.
posted by mcwetboy at 12:57 PM on October 30, 2002

I find flaw in your assertation, mcwetboy, your e-mail and real name are posted.

posted by Dark Messiah at 1:01 PM on October 30, 2002

Shane: Screw you and your Legos.

That's it. MetaTalk.
posted by eddydamascene at 1:07 PM on October 30, 2002

eddy: That's it. MetaTalk.

It's official: This thread has gone around in circles.
posted by Shane at 1:35 PM on October 30, 2002

Nuke this thread from space. It's the only way to be sure.

I think we need to assemble a group of apostles to index and catalog every single Metatalk comment Matt's ever made into a huge bible. Then during redundant Metatalk threads we can just reference things like Matt 2739:53721, thus invalidating all dogpile posts that will surely come afterwards.

I pick Luke! Who wants to be Judas?
posted by Stan Chin at 1:41 PM on October 30, 2002

Um, this all looks about plain and normal to me, for a post like "Stop making excuses for Muslim Extremists."

I don't go near threads like that. Don't we all know what to expect when the can is clearly labelled "Worms"?

I understand your point, but I disagree with the implication that "political" or "contentious" or "hot-button" threads should be treated differently than any other on the site. Feeling passionately (or defensively or threatened or evangelical) about a subject does NOT excuse bad behavior or attacks upon fellow Metafilter members. If such tends to occur more often in certain types of threads, then it behooves us to be MORE vigilant in those threads (if we choose to read them), not less.
posted by rushmc at 1:46 PM on October 30, 2002

Can I be Brian?
posted by i_cola at 1:50 PM on October 30, 2002

Actually this thread reminds me of discussions I've had with my mother. For British readers I'll say the following and I think you'll understand how these things go every time.

I read 'The Guardian'.
Mum reads the 'Daily Mail'
posted by feelinglistless at 1:50 PM on October 30, 2002

I agree with rushmc: Reading opinions that you find outrageous doesn't entitle you to call anyone a nasty name. In fact, being called a nasty name doesn't entitle you to call anyone a nasty name.
posted by timeistight at 1:52 PM on October 30, 2002

feelinglistless, I can relate, and I'm not even British.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 1:54 PM on October 30, 2002

Metafilter: That's it! MetaTalk!
posted by Yelling At Nothing at 1:57 PM on October 30, 2002

I find flaw in your assertation, mcwetboy, your e-mail and real name are posted.

Nice shot.
posted by rcade at 2:00 PM on October 30, 2002

I wonder when I get to see all this reasoned discourse this place is supposed to be famous for.

Or do we pay extra for that ? ;-)

No, you just have to be personally invited by Matt into UltraFilter. It's great over here. Free drinks and everything.
posted by Ty Webb at 2:07 PM on October 30, 2002

I find flaw in your assertation, mcwetboy, your e-mail and real name are posted.

Nice shot.

Good job on biting your tongue after that, too, McW.

I pick Luke! Who wants to be Judas?

I want to be one of those funky beasts of the Apocalypse/Apocamon.


posted by Shane at 2:16 PM on October 30, 2002

A thought.

The involved parties are pointing at everyone else's bad behaviour while excusing or disregarding their own, and I'm as guilty of that as anyone else, for which I apologize.

1. Bad behaviour takes place in the thread.


2. I complain about the bad behaviour in the thread, using bad behaviour to do so.
   
3. JonnyX complains about my bad behaviour in the thread, using bad behaviour to do so.


4. I take JonnyX to MetaTalk, carefully -- if unsuccessfully -- making a distinction between my bad behaviour and his bad behaviour, emphasizing his and minimizing mine.


5. Discussion ensues. Some people point out that I'm hardly innocent. I try to distinguish between a general callout using strong language (me) and a personal attack using strong language (him).


6. Polo Mr. Polo objects to my thin skin and piles on using strong language.


7. I return fire at PMP, using strong language and accusing him of bad behaviour.


8. Dark Messiah hoists me on my own petard. (We've swapped e-mail. I think we're cool. That's why I like having e-mail addresses handy.)

I think we're cutting ourselves too much slack, and each other not enough. As I said, myself included.

What a day.
posted by mcwetboy at 2:17 PM on October 30, 2002

No, you just have to be personally invited by Matt into UltraFilter. It's great over here. Free drinks and everything.

And don't forget the 144,000 beautiful virgins!
posted by y2karl at 2:18 PM on October 30, 2002

*counts*

Hey! I only got 124,996!
posted by gleuschk at 2:22 PM on October 30, 2002

Sorry, gleuschk...Wilt Chamberlain got to the other 19,004 first.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 2:29 PM on October 30, 2002

If you accept Mathowie as your Administrator and Censor, he will protect and guide you away from the trolling. He has promised, as it was written:

"Once I've identified someone as a troll, set something in their user record as troll. Immediately make all their posts invisible to all users except them". - Matt 266:1350
posted by eddydamascene at 2:30 PM on October 30, 2002

And don't forget the 144,000 beautiful virgins!

Can't believe I forgot the virgins! Virgins, virgins, virgins! But then, I usually skip the virgins and head right for the open bar and buffet. Oh, and also the reasoned discourse. Love that shit.
posted by Ty Webb at 2:40 PM on October 30, 2002

I think some of mine are lying about being virgins and they won't stand still so I can count them, but I think I've been ripped off too.

"Once I've identified someone as a troll, set something in their user record as troll. Immediately make all their posts invisible to all users except them". - Matt 266:1350

That would be a beautiful thing to see (or not see, I guess). I can just picture certain users pounding away at their keyboards cursing because no-one will respond to them, then the look of shock and horror as what has happened slowly dawns on them.
posted by dg at 3:09 PM on October 30, 2002

eddydamascene bent my wooky.
posted by quonsar at 3:17 PM on October 30, 2002

If I post a link to an amazing lego site, we're not instantly split into pro- and anti-lego building blocks. Heated arguments don't take place about the author ignoring erector sets when speaking of lego.

I, for one, have had it up to here with this site's ridiculous lego/erector set bias. Must I continue to be the lone voice of Lincoln Log sanity?
posted by scody at 5:06 PM on October 30, 2002

How about we get a filter on all the bad words; that makes flaming harder, plus we'll end up with some more interesting insults as people try to get around the filters.

Sadly, I doubt it. What we'd more likely end up with is "eat sh1t you f u c k h o l e s!!!" If someone is going to curse at me, I'd just assume it be readable, eh? Eh?
posted by cortex at 5:29 PM on October 30, 2002

Metafilter: A bunch of oversensitive pussies.
posted by dhoyt at 5:45 PM on October 30, 2002

Metafilter: No beautiful virgins.
posted by gottabefunky at 5:54 PM on October 30, 2002

Metafilter: Assume it be readable.
posted by eddydamascene at 6:03 PM on October 30, 2002

Metafilter: Hot dog said need a town.
posted by mcsweetie at 6:49 PM on October 30, 2002

And don't forget the 144,000 beautiful virgins!

Guys! Guys! What are you doing to those raisins!?!




posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:59 PM on October 30, 2002

Metafilter: No beautiful virgins.

Hey hey hey, I'm beautiful!

*slight unnerving feeling that I've just accidently revealed something*
posted by Stan Chin at 7:27 PM on October 30, 2002

Bah! Virgins are for wimps. Real men and women, when faced with one, make their excuses and leave.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 7:39 PM on October 30, 2002

Has someone hacked your username, Migs? You disappoint me!
posted by rushmc at 7:55 PM on October 30, 2002

This thread his Hilarious.
posted by dcgartn at 7:57 PM on October 30, 2002

*slight unnerving feeling that I've just accidently revealed something*

There's no shame in being beautiful. ;)
posted by Dark Messiah at 7:58 PM on October 30, 2002

Virgins are for wimps. Real men...make their excuses and leave.

Well, that certainly explains a lot.

Er...I mean...shoot. You and me both, Stan.
posted by hippugeek at 7:59 PM on October 30, 2002

Real men and women, when faced with one, make their excuses and leave.

Or roll over and fall asleep. Wait--that happens irregardless.
posted by y2karl at 9:51 PM on October 30, 2002

This thread his Hilarious.

I know comedy feeds on humiliating embarrassments, but this is just too cringeworthy. Until mcwetboy's 8-point rosary, the fact that he couldn't let JonnyX's counterflaming speak for itself was still possibly merely goofy, but not after. Is MetaTalk always this confessional?
posted by Zurishaddai at 10:32 PM on October 30, 2002

Is MetaTalk always this confessional?

Well, it's almost always this entertaining in a "Reality TV for Online Junkies" kind of way.

posted by mischief at 12:22 AM on October 31, 2002

Virgins are for wimps

Hey, it's a great chance to be the best they ever had!
posted by dg at 5:08 AM on October 31, 2002

Metafilter: Wash a window, wash two. There is a fish here.
posted by mcsweetie at 5:57 AM on October 31, 2002

Just what I need. Reasoned discourse about nonexistent virgins.

*Hitler enters, stage left. Discussion ensues. Thread ends*
posted by konolia at 7:00 AM on October 31, 2002

Godwin: Virgins?
posted by eddydamascene at 9:36 AM on October 31, 2002

stressed virgins

heh.

posted by ginz at 9:50 AM on October 31, 2002

Bah! Virgins are for wimps. Real men and women, when faced with one, make their excuses and leave.

By your statement Mig, a man to truly be with a virgin would have to be like a knight in shining armor, well rounded to de-flower one. True?
posted by thomcatspike at 2:54 PM on October 31, 2002

Very true, Thom. Or very young. Or deeply in love. That would do it too. ;)
posted by MiguelCardoso at 4:36 PM on October 31, 2002

*glares sulkily at MiguelCardoso*

Bah, I almost had you....
posted by rushmc at 5:45 PM on October 31, 2002

Why are all the aggressive little fucks the ones who don't post their real names and e-mail addresses? You, sir, are a coward.
i wish i could change my username to AggressiveLittleFuck.
posted by quonsar at 4:35 AM on November 1, 2002

Metafilter: It's Miller Time at the hatchery.
posted by mcsweetie at 7:27 AM on November 1, 2002

I'll put my contributions to this site against JonnyX's any day.

perhaps we could have like a world title fight or something.

posted by sgt.serenity at 11:15 AM on November 4, 2002