bushfilter August 24, 2003 7:11 PM Subscribe
This is garbage.
This post was deleted for the following reason: Poster's Request -- frimble
Please let's not let it slide for fear of re-enforcing the poster's conspiracy theories. Why deny 111 what he or she wanted all along?
posted by Space Coyote at 7:19 PM on August 24, 2003
posted by Space Coyote at 7:19 PM on August 24, 2003
Or re-inforcing, either.
posted by Space Coyote at 7:20 PM on August 24, 2003
posted by Space Coyote at 7:20 PM on August 24, 2003
Not if the OPinions are unpopular, evidentially.
posted by timeistight at 7:21 PM on August 24, 2003
posted by timeistight at 7:21 PM on August 24, 2003
Run Ragged
I said I don't want to be older, but it's be older
and older or nothing, right: and day by day
it's been older every day since the beginning:
still, there was a bracket of young years
within which one could say, these are not the
older years or the baby years: there are, as
Shakespeare said, groups of time, the
transitions from one group to another usually
unalarming: people who have nothing to say
should say nothing: they should drum syllables
or squeeze verbs (or nouns) or cast them like
die, craps, creeps: for example, I don't
feel at home in this universe and it may be
the only one: that is so pathetic: I think
that is so heartrending with content:
how can the place you come from not be your
home: is the only way to make a phrase
interesting to make it sound like it's not a
phrase: or it could be two phrases or go two
different ways when you are really going nowhere
well, the human race needs a better track,
the track itself worn or grown over.
-A.R. Ammons
posted by clavdivs at 7:25 PM on August 24, 2003
I said I don't want to be older, but it's be older
and older or nothing, right: and day by day
it's been older every day since the beginning:
still, there was a bracket of young years
within which one could say, these are not the
older years or the baby years: there are, as
Shakespeare said, groups of time, the
transitions from one group to another usually
unalarming: people who have nothing to say
should say nothing: they should drum syllables
or squeeze verbs (or nouns) or cast them like
die, craps, creeps: for example, I don't
feel at home in this universe and it may be
the only one: that is so pathetic: I think
that is so heartrending with content:
how can the place you come from not be your
home: is the only way to make a phrase
interesting to make it sound like it's not a
phrase: or it could be two phrases or go two
different ways when you are really going nowhere
well, the human race needs a better track,
the track itself worn or grown over.
-A.R. Ammons
posted by clavdivs at 7:25 PM on August 24, 2003
the next person to make a meta about 111 gets smacked upside the head
posted by signal at 7:33 PM on August 24, 2003
posted by signal at 7:33 PM on August 24, 2003
A proposed solution: The next person to respond to any post or comment made by 111 gets a smack upside the head.
What would be more damning than (0 comments)?
going to try very hard to follow own advice
posted by Space Coyote at 7:38 PM on August 24, 2003
What would be more damning than (0 comments)?
going to try very hard to follow own advice
posted by Space Coyote at 7:38 PM on August 24, 2003
I'm not sure what everyone's so peevish about, Metafilter is ALL opinion anymore. And when it comes to politics, facts have always run a distant third here behind "my petty animosities" and "highlighting my credentials as an outraged party-member for the edification and approval of the collective." So what makes this so offensive? That it's pro-Bush (horrors!) or that it's from 111 (horrors upon horrors!)?
There's plenty here on the left who easily are as vociferous and irritating as 111 is for the right. When I start seeing calls for their posts to be removed and for them to be banned, maybe I'll again start thinking that the ire 111 generates is due to his breaking the rules and not because he thinks and speaks differently than the rest of you. Until that day, I think the man ought to be able to say what he thinks, just like the rest of us, and be refuted with logic and fact, rather than dismissed and villified out of hand because he has a different idea of what's right and what's not.
posted by UncleFes at 9:43 PM on August 24, 2003
There's plenty here on the left who easily are as vociferous and irritating as 111 is for the right. When I start seeing calls for their posts to be removed and for them to be banned, maybe I'll again start thinking that the ire 111 generates is due to his breaking the rules and not because he thinks and speaks differently than the rest of you. Until that day, I think the man ought to be able to say what he thinks, just like the rest of us, and be refuted with logic and fact, rather than dismissed and villified out of hand because he has a different idea of what's right and what's not.
posted by UncleFes at 9:43 PM on August 24, 2003
That is crap. I am equally amused and disgusted at 111's opinions like every other thinking person, but he has just as much right to post this sort of drivel to the front page as f&m has to post his diatribes and everyone else who daily post their leftist diatribes.
Get a grip. It's called other opinions.
posted by xmutex at 9:46 PM on August 24, 2003
Get a grip. It's called other opinions.
posted by xmutex at 9:46 PM on August 24, 2003
To which the forum (convincingly) replied "Yes".Only if you stop reading after the first 10 posts. Beyond that, the forum delivers a definite answer of "Yes, No, or Maybe".
posted by mischief at 9:54 PM on August 24, 2003
Until that day, I think the man ought to be able to say what he thinks, just like the rest of us
Surely, people shouldn't be encouraged to make front page posts just in order to "say what they think"? To be fair, 111's post doesn't strictly really fit into this category (although the cynical might feel otherwise), but do we really have to lay down and accept that "Metafilter is all about opinion" without a fight?
posted by Jimbob at 10:31 PM on August 24, 2003
Surely, people shouldn't be encouraged to make front page posts just in order to "say what they think"? To be fair, 111's post doesn't strictly really fit into this category (although the cynical might feel otherwise), but do we really have to lay down and accept that "Metafilter is all about opinion" without a fight?
posted by Jimbob at 10:31 PM on August 24, 2003
As much as it shocks me to say it, the Pat Buchanan op-ed linked by 111 in a comment was worth posting. I can't believe I'm saying it, but it was a million times better than the main links in the original post, it was fairly balanced and approached an issue from more than one angle and said things that people from any political stripe could take points from.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:59 PM on August 24, 2003
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:59 PM on August 24, 2003
I think a lot of you guys just want 111 to fail miserably.
posted by insomnyuk at 11:38 PM on August 24, 2003
posted by insomnyuk at 11:38 PM on August 24, 2003
If op-ed and poli threads keep-a-coming, could we please add a feature that lets one look at MeFi sans political threads before the election year gets into too much swing.
posted by rudyfink at 1:02 AM on August 25, 2003
posted by rudyfink at 1:02 AM on August 25, 2003
I think the man ought to be able to say what he thinks, just like the rest of us, and be refuted with logic and fact, rather than dismissed and villified out of hand
the op-ed was refuted with many, many comments about Bush abysmal performance and his undeniably right-wing agenda. the fpp sucked because the main link was a weak op-ed by a White House employee who, surprise, defends Bush.
There's plenty here on the left who easily are as vociferous and irritating as 111 is for the right. When I start seeing calls for their posts to be removed and for them to be banned,
too bad that your bad faith apparently blinds you, otherwise you'd remember all those "let's ban foldy" MeTa threads. and foldy is not a exactly right winger, I'd say
trharlan,
thanks for pissing all over the threads you don't like, that's a good MeFi citizen
at least you admit it
skallas,
at least DenBeste is funny (involuntarily, but he is)
posted by matteo at 3:29 AM on August 25, 2003
the op-ed was refuted with many, many comments about Bush abysmal performance and his undeniably right-wing agenda. the fpp sucked because the main link was a weak op-ed by a White House employee who, surprise, defends Bush.
There's plenty here on the left who easily are as vociferous and irritating as 111 is for the right. When I start seeing calls for their posts to be removed and for them to be banned,
too bad that your bad faith apparently blinds you, otherwise you'd remember all those "let's ban foldy" MeTa threads. and foldy is not a exactly right winger, I'd say
trharlan,
thanks for pissing all over the threads you don't like, that's a good MeFi citizen
at least you admit it
skallas,
at least DenBeste is funny (involuntarily, but he is)
posted by matteo at 3:29 AM on August 25, 2003
When I read the thread, my immediate thought was: Who the hell is Paul Berkowitz? Why's he important? Am I supposed to know his name? By contrast, SDB would at least have a former metafilter connection, no matter how unworthy of discussion the article actually is.
posted by raysmj at 3:29 AM on August 25, 2003
posted by raysmj at 3:29 AM on August 25, 2003
Paul Berkowitz was the Son of Sam, right? ; >
this 111-bashing really is getting old...don't we need folks like him to disagree with, if for nothing else?
(and some of us prefer pansy pinko, thank you)
posted by amberglow at 5:00 AM on August 25, 2003
this 111-bashing really is getting old...don't we need folks like him to disagree with, if for nothing else?
(and some of us prefer pansy pinko, thank you)
posted by amberglow at 5:00 AM on August 25, 2003
MetaFilter: Some of Us Prefer Pansy Pinko, Thank You™
posted by JollyWanker at 5:32 AM on August 25, 2003
posted by JollyWanker at 5:32 AM on August 25, 2003
I'm starting to feel a grudging respect for 111. The guy must have more fortitude than I do - I'd never hang out in a place where I got attacked even a tiny fraction of the times he does. It does make me wonder about his motivations for coming here, but I wouldn't try to discourage him from doing so because he does contribute.
Fine, he made a weak front page post. But he redeemed himself by providing an excellent inner link. And MeFiers behaved very well and simply debunked his article. So... at the end of the day it was a not bad, overall worthwhile thread. And that's what matters most in the end, doesn't it? I've seen really promising links turn into flaming shit.
The main issue with 111 is that most of us disagree with him, not that his behaviour is really out of bounds. And I figure that as a community we ought to be able to bear with that. It'd be nice if people would ignore him or politely call him out as they saw fit, but otherwise left off the complaining and the dogpiling.
posted by orange swan at 6:09 AM on August 25, 2003
Fine, he made a weak front page post. But he redeemed himself by providing an excellent inner link. And MeFiers behaved very well and simply debunked his article. So... at the end of the day it was a not bad, overall worthwhile thread. And that's what matters most in the end, doesn't it? I've seen really promising links turn into flaming shit.
The main issue with 111 is that most of us disagree with him, not that his behaviour is really out of bounds. And I figure that as a community we ought to be able to bear with that. It'd be nice if people would ignore him or politely call him out as they saw fit, but otherwise left off the complaining and the dogpiling.
posted by orange swan at 6:09 AM on August 25, 2003
If op-ed and poli threads keep-a-coming, could we please add a feature that lets one look at MeFi sans political threads before the election year gets into too much swing.
This may have been discussed and dismissed out of hand already, but what would be the implications both technical and social to adding categories to the post page, then adding a category filter to the fp drop down box? For example, categories could be things like "politics", "fun and games", "strange and unusual", etc. Then, people who just want to see what groovy flash stuff has been discovered could do that, the people who use MeFi as a political discussion board could easily find those posts, etc., etc., etc.
Again, I've no idea how difficult it would be to implement, or even if it's something desirable...but it's a thought.
posted by dejah420 at 6:16 AM on August 25, 2003
This may have been discussed and dismissed out of hand already, but what would be the implications both technical and social to adding categories to the post page, then adding a category filter to the fp drop down box? For example, categories could be things like "politics", "fun and games", "strange and unusual", etc. Then, people who just want to see what groovy flash stuff has been discovered could do that, the people who use MeFi as a political discussion board could easily find those posts, etc., etc., etc.
Again, I've no idea how difficult it would be to implement, or even if it's something desirable...but it's a thought.
posted by dejah420 at 6:16 AM on August 25, 2003
dejah,
wouldn't that turn MeFi into a kind of MetaPlastic?
posted by matteo at 6:34 AM on August 25, 2003
wouldn't that turn MeFi into a kind of MetaPlastic?
posted by matteo at 6:34 AM on August 25, 2003
too bad that your bad faith apparently blinds you, otherwise you'd remember all those "let's ban foldy" MeTa threads. and foldy is not a exactly right winger, I'd say
I remember a lot of threads, but not a lot of calls for banning or even hushing foldy. In fact, what I remember is a lot of trenchant defense on his behalf. And the case could be made that foldy is FAR more provocative than 111, and just as email-address-less. Either way, I'd say the same for Foldy - let the man have his say. I don't like him, and I don't like what he has to say, and I certainly don't like the way he says it, but he's got a point of view and, even I must admit, sometimes the bastard is right, and at all times he makes you think, even if what you think is that you want to kill him slowly. Personally, as what passes for a conservative around here, I'd like to see 111 be a little less provocative. The minority viewpoint is always better served by reason and soft persuasion than it is by firebranding. But I think it's unseemly to defend one firebrand and denounce another solely on the basis of ideology. Take your position and defend it vigorously? No problem. But calling for the banning of opinions contrary to yours smacks of hypocrisy and [deleted by Godwin Patrol].
posted by UncleFes at 7:01 AM on August 25, 2003
I remember a lot of threads, but not a lot of calls for banning or even hushing foldy. In fact, what I remember is a lot of trenchant defense on his behalf. And the case could be made that foldy is FAR more provocative than 111, and just as email-address-less. Either way, I'd say the same for Foldy - let the man have his say. I don't like him, and I don't like what he has to say, and I certainly don't like the way he says it, but he's got a point of view and, even I must admit, sometimes the bastard is right, and at all times he makes you think, even if what you think is that you want to kill him slowly. Personally, as what passes for a conservative around here, I'd like to see 111 be a little less provocative. The minority viewpoint is always better served by reason and soft persuasion than it is by firebranding. But I think it's unseemly to defend one firebrand and denounce another solely on the basis of ideology. Take your position and defend it vigorously? No problem. But calling for the banning of opinions contrary to yours smacks of hypocrisy and [deleted by Godwin Patrol].
posted by UncleFes at 7:01 AM on August 25, 2003
Is that better or worse than MetaCrapfest?
Hey, what happened to those kitties!?
On topic, both the post and the restraint in response by the poster can be read as an olive branch of sorts. Whether this was his intention or not, I don't know but that's one way it can be read. Since we all seem to be able to read so much into so little of what each other says or does not say, how about having the glass half full for a change now and then? Otherwise, let me express my utter disinterest in this foofara.
posted by y2karl at 8:15 AM on August 25, 2003
Hey, what happened to those kitties!?
On topic, both the post and the restraint in response by the poster can be read as an olive branch of sorts. Whether this was his intention or not, I don't know but that's one way it can be read. Since we all seem to be able to read so much into so little of what each other says or does not say, how about having the glass half full for a change now and then? Otherwise, let me express my utter disinterest in this foofara.
posted by y2karl at 8:15 AM on August 25, 2003
I think F&M and 111 are the same person having a good joke at all of you.
posted by xmutex at 8:45 AM on August 25, 2003
posted by xmutex at 8:45 AM on August 25, 2003
As much as it shocks me to say it, the Pat Buchanan op-ed linked by 111 in a comment was worth posting.
I'm going to agree with mathowie here. The difference between Berkowitz's article and Buchanan's articles is simple: Berkowitz wrote his as a Bush supporter, and Buchanan wrote his as a political analyst.
If the FPP was meant to be an analytical article to start a discussion, it failed badly. However, if you like battles of opinions in the source material, then it's definitely up your alley.
I'd like to stick to the former. We can hash out our own opinions in the comments.
posted by mikeh at 8:52 AM on August 25, 2003
I'm going to agree with mathowie here. The difference between Berkowitz's article and Buchanan's articles is simple: Berkowitz wrote his as a Bush supporter, and Buchanan wrote his as a political analyst.
If the FPP was meant to be an analytical article to start a discussion, it failed badly. However, if you like battles of opinions in the source material, then it's definitely up your alley.
I'd like to stick to the former. We can hash out our own opinions in the comments.
posted by mikeh at 8:52 AM on August 25, 2003
And the case could be made that foldy is FAR more provocative than 111, and just as email-address-less
He went farther than an email addy though. He provided a way to contact him IRL. Just for the record.
posted by bargle at 8:53 AM on August 25, 2003
He went farther than an email addy though. He provided a way to contact him IRL. Just for the record.
posted by bargle at 8:53 AM on August 25, 2003
I don't know know what the problem with these posts are, be they left, right or twisted.
I like reading these posts; they help me analyze my own beliefs and determine if I've started to succumb to propaganda from any source. I enjoy finding myself challenged by dissenting and assenting opinions alike. Much of the commentary is banal and ineffectual, but who cares? There's almost always something redeeming generated by these posts, even if the FPP itself fails.
I don't understand the call to censor opinions simply because they're political or they're extreme. We live in a world which is experiencing turmoil which is unknown to many of us, and there is a desire to have discussion, to try to understand what is going on, and what should be done.
I certainly wouldn't want every FPP to be about politics, but why must none of them contain opinions? Why must none of them be controversial?
Do we really want Metafilter to be subtitled 'a place for intelligent people to discuss insignificant matters'? Let's stop arguing about what we allow people to talk about, and just enjoy the talk.
posted by mosch at 9:04 AM on August 25, 2003
I like reading these posts; they help me analyze my own beliefs and determine if I've started to succumb to propaganda from any source. I enjoy finding myself challenged by dissenting and assenting opinions alike. Much of the commentary is banal and ineffectual, but who cares? There's almost always something redeeming generated by these posts, even if the FPP itself fails.
I don't understand the call to censor opinions simply because they're political or they're extreme. We live in a world which is experiencing turmoil which is unknown to many of us, and there is a desire to have discussion, to try to understand what is going on, and what should be done.
I certainly wouldn't want every FPP to be about politics, but why must none of them contain opinions? Why must none of them be controversial?
Do we really want Metafilter to be subtitled 'a place for intelligent people to discuss insignificant matters'? Let's stop arguing about what we allow people to talk about, and just enjoy the talk.
posted by mosch at 9:04 AM on August 25, 2003
Right on, mosch
posted by Joeforking at 9:10 AM on August 25, 2003
posted by Joeforking at 9:10 AM on August 25, 2003
succumb to propaganda from any source
posted by thomcatspike at 9:25 AM on August 25, 2003
posted by thomcatspike at 9:25 AM on August 25, 2003
I think F&M and 111 are the same person having a good joke at all of you.
They certainly went to the same casting-pearls-before-swine writing school.
posted by timeistight at 9:25 AM on August 25, 2003
They certainly went to the same casting-pearls-before-swine writing school.
posted by timeistight at 9:25 AM on August 25, 2003
what's with the email obsession? i list my email, but that doesn't mean i promise to read it. i've been in arguments by mail before where i've simply deleted messages without reading them (it removes all temptation to reply). i've even automated the process in some cases (write from an address at my former employers and you'll get a request to contact me in writing and a warning that the email was automatically deleted). and i've also signed up with hotmail (or was it yahoo?) to get addresses for subscribing to services that i then never check.
in other words, an email adress is worthless. on the other hand, someone who builds an identity within a forum has much more of an incentive to interact within that environment than they do through email. so replying to them on mefi/meta makes much more sense. if you want to send messages that are inappropriate for mefi/meta then maybe you shouldn't be sending them anyway - taking a deep breath going for a stroll in the big blue room might be more appropriate...
posted by andrew cooke at 9:27 AM on August 25, 2003
in other words, an email adress is worthless. on the other hand, someone who builds an identity within a forum has much more of an incentive to interact within that environment than they do through email. so replying to them on mefi/meta makes much more sense. if you want to send messages that are inappropriate for mefi/meta then maybe you shouldn't be sending them anyway - taking a deep breath going for a stroll in the big blue room might be more appropriate...
posted by andrew cooke at 9:27 AM on August 25, 2003
"politics", "fun and games", "strange and unusual"Wouldn't you want categories that suggested different topics? Those 3 are all pretty much the same.
;-P
posted by mischief at 9:27 AM on August 25, 2003
Especially if you insert hot, wet action either for or after.
posted by y2karl at 9:47 AM on August 25, 2003
posted by y2karl at 9:47 AM on August 25, 2003
I think F&M and 111 are the same person having a good joke at all of you.
Haha...
Seen in comments the last week; 111 = konolia, 111 == hama7 & now F&M.
Now wonder, 111' s handle is it; one one one, one hundred one, one eleven, eleven one, Or 3 strikes.
posted by thomcatspike at 11:03 AM on August 25, 2003
Haha...
Seen in comments the last week; 111 = konolia, 111 == hama7 & now F&M.
Now wonder, 111' s handle is it; one one one, one hundred one, one eleven, eleven one, Or 3 strikes.
posted by thomcatspike at 11:03 AM on August 25, 2003
also identified with witty(?) not long ago, iirc
posted by andrew cooke at 11:49 AM on August 25, 2003
posted by andrew cooke at 11:49 AM on August 25, 2003
One hundred one? I think that's the one with the round dealie in the middle, thomcatspike.
posted by Samsonov14 at 12:02 PM on August 25, 2003
posted by Samsonov14 at 12:02 PM on August 25, 2003
I'm mathowie. I'm going to ban all of you and start over.
posted by timeistight at 12:58 PM on August 25, 2003
posted by timeistight at 12:58 PM on August 25, 2003
111 is the New Zealand equivalent of 911. This should help you de-code it all.
posted by meech at 4:16 PM on August 25, 2003
posted by meech at 4:16 PM on August 25, 2003
What Mosch said. Triple it, and add some caramel sauce.
If the general reaction to that editorial 'round here is any indication, I expect that the ideas in it were, in fact, a novel if unpleasant experience for many MeFites.
posted by namespan at 4:24 PM on August 25, 2003
If the general reaction to that editorial 'round here is any indication, I expect that the ideas in it were, in fact, a novel if unpleasant experience for many MeFites.
posted by namespan at 4:24 PM on August 25, 2003
111 is the New Zealand equivalent of 911. This should help you de-code it all.
So 111 thinks he's our emergency line?
Its not out of the realm of possiblity that he's a kiwi, but he seems to use vernacular American English and hasn't talked once about sheep.
posted by bshort at 4:39 PM on August 25, 2003
So 111 thinks he's our emergency line?
Its not out of the realm of possiblity that he's a kiwi, but he seems to use vernacular American English and hasn't talked once about sheep.
posted by bshort at 4:39 PM on August 25, 2003
…unlike dg, who talks of little else.
posted by timeistight at 4:57 PM on August 25, 2003
posted by timeistight at 4:57 PM on August 25, 2003
Hey! I resent that! So, if 111 moved to Australia, would he have to change his username to 000?
posted by dg at 5:45 PM on August 25, 2003
posted by dg at 5:45 PM on August 25, 2003
Hmmm, on those old rotary dial telephones, 111 would be several seconds quicker to dial than 000 in an emergency. So why the different numbers...911 vs 000 history - not very helpful, aah, here we go.
Just talk amongst yourselves.
posted by Jimbob at 8:17 PM on August 25, 2003
Just talk amongst yourselves.
posted by Jimbob at 8:17 PM on August 25, 2003
Also, Jimbob, the old rotary-dial phones in NZ have the numbers in the opposite order to those in Australia. My recollection is that the reason the numbers that are slowest to dial, being furthest from the dial stop, were chosen to minimise the risk of accidental (eg kids) emergency calls. I just knew that piece of information would come in handy one day.
posted by dg at 8:51 PM on August 25, 2003
posted by dg at 8:51 PM on August 25, 2003
I thought it was because of the coriolis effect.
...wait, I said that as a quick joke, but honestly, that probably makes the most stupid sense ever. Are people down there used to the whole counter-clockwise motion? Is your life ruled by the motion of toilets?
posted by Stan Chin at 9:01 PM on August 25, 2003
...wait, I said that as a quick joke, but honestly, that probably makes the most stupid sense ever. Are people down there used to the whole counter-clockwise motion? Is your life ruled by the motion of toilets?
posted by Stan Chin at 9:01 PM on August 25, 2003
Stan, more accurately OUR Northern clockwise spinning lives are. Afterall, when the first clock faces were being built, why do you think the Europeans chose to have them move in the direction that they did?
posted by jonson at 9:10 PM on August 25, 2003
posted by jonson at 9:10 PM on August 25, 2003
but they didn't have toilets when clocks were invented.
posted by Space Coyote at 9:28 PM on August 25, 2003
posted by Space Coyote at 9:28 PM on August 25, 2003
Coyote - I THINK you're joking, but I'm not sure. Damn this text based interface! Just in case, I'm going to be a jackass and point out that the coriolis effect applies to all water going down drains, not just toilets...
posted by jonson at 9:52 PM on August 25, 2003
posted by jonson at 9:52 PM on August 25, 2003
Sun dials trump flush toilets and mechanical clocks, so there. ;)
posted by Space Coyote at 10:05 PM on August 25, 2003
posted by Space Coyote at 10:05 PM on August 25, 2003
"So which way do sundials turn?"
Sundial-wise, of course.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 10:14 PM on August 25, 2003
Sundial-wise, of course.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 10:14 PM on August 25, 2003
"So which way do sundials turn?"
Sundial-wise, of course.
I had a sneaking suspicion about this one: from the sundials FAQ:
Sundial-wise, of course.
I had a sneaking suspicion about this one: from the sundials FAQ:
Please can you tell me where I can get some information? Everything I find is for the northern hemisphere!posted by Space Coyote at 10:59 PM on August 25, 2003
Yes, it's true, but there are only two important differences, that the gnomon points at the south celestial pole, and that the hour numbers go round the dial in the opposite direction to the Northern hemisphere. But everything else is exactly the same.
(this is probably the boring nerdish crap I should use to actually make FPPs once in a while)
posted by Space Coyote at 11:00 PM on August 25, 2003
posted by Space Coyote at 11:00 PM on August 25, 2003
I've never seen anyone drive their trash out to the street and then beat the hell out of it with a stick. I've never seen that.
posted by bargle at 12:15 AM on August 26, 2003
posted by bargle at 12:15 AM on August 26, 2003
[scratches head, looks at mental notes]
Also, "7" in binary.
As in "Lucky" # 7, don't think so, take a look. 111 pulled the weekend Meta-TRIFECTA. Say it because 111 has our attention, thrice.
Two front page Meta-Talk threads about 111 and an interesting Meta-Filter FPP posted by 111. Planned more like it. Yesterday swore part of 111's FPP was on Meta-Filter's side blog too(but I don't see it now)???making it the daily double.
posted by thomcatspike at 10:44 AM on August 26, 2003
Also, "7" in binary.
As in "Lucky" # 7, don't think so, take a look. 111 pulled the weekend Meta-TRIFECTA. Say it because 111 has our attention, thrice.
Two front page Meta-Talk threads about 111 and an interesting Meta-Filter FPP posted by 111. Planned more like it. Yesterday swore part of 111's FPP was on Meta-Filter's side blog too(but I don't see it now)???making it the daily double.
posted by thomcatspike at 10:44 AM on August 26, 2003
PusillanimousPissingPosturingPetFilter
thomcatspike, since you are of the cattype you better be very careful of your conjecturing, especially if what they say ("curiosity killed the thomspike") is true!
posted by taz at 11:47 AM on August 26, 2003
thomcatspike, since you are of the cattype you better be very careful of your conjecturing, especially if what they say ("curiosity killed the thomspike") is true!
posted by taz at 11:47 AM on August 26, 2003
Taz, think someone did their homework so mentioned the above.
("curiosity killed the thomspike")
thom's cat been piked
posted by thomcatspike at 11:56 AM on August 26, 2003
("curiosity killed the thomspike")
thom's cat been piked
posted by thomcatspike at 11:56 AM on August 26, 2003
thomcatspike - seriously, what's the deal? Is English your second language?
posted by jonson at 12:24 PM on August 26, 2003
posted by jonson at 12:24 PM on August 26, 2003
jonson, You been saying this for some time, why besides you are trolling?
posted by thomcatspike at 12:28 PM on August 26, 2003
posted by thomcatspike at 12:28 PM on August 26, 2003
I try to make my comments short and to the point, let you fill in the rhetoric. May be why you think the way you do with your above statement.
posted by thomcatspike at 12:30 PM on August 26, 2003
posted by thomcatspike at 12:30 PM on August 26, 2003
the second rule of MetaFilter is you do not fuck with thomcatspike
leave the man -- and his syntax -- alone
posted by matteo at 12:50 PM on August 26, 2003
leave the man -- and his syntax -- alone
posted by matteo at 12:50 PM on August 26, 2003
thomcatspike-- massive head trauma? 24/7 drunkenness? what is it man?
posted by xmutex at 12:51 PM on August 26, 2003
posted by xmutex at 12:51 PM on August 26, 2003
thomcatspike: I think the reason jonson (and others) are curious is that you seem to make mistakes in diction and construction that are almost always unique to ESL students, dyslexics, and those with certain aphasias.
Understand, I'm not criticizing you, but you do have a unique way of speaking, and although you are regarded with genuine affection by many MeFites, to newcomers your speech is sometimes bewildering.
posted by bshort at 12:53 PM on August 26, 2003
Understand, I'm not criticizing you, but you do have a unique way of speaking, and although you are regarded with genuine affection by many MeFites, to newcomers your speech is sometimes bewildering.
posted by bshort at 12:53 PM on August 26, 2003
That's just the way TCS writes. You learn to appreciate it.
posted by timeistight at 1:04 PM on August 26, 2003
posted by timeistight at 1:04 PM on August 26, 2003
My favorite thing is when TCS posts a grammar correction to one of his comments.
'Tis method in it...
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 1:06 PM on August 26, 2003
'Tis method in it...
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 1:06 PM on August 26, 2003
He's been through the ringer (at least) once before too. He's been here well over a year now, let him be.
posted by Ufez Jones at 1:10 PM on August 26, 2003
posted by Ufez Jones at 1:10 PM on August 26, 2003
oi. I was just picking up on iconomy's playing around, and then messing with TCS because of the "C" in TCS. Really, we can all see that the thomcat has more of a stream of consciousness thing going on, but if there weren't anything behind it he would have been pancaked a long time ago...
posted by taz at 1:19 PM on August 26, 2003
posted by taz at 1:19 PM on August 26, 2003
I love how the topic of this thread has morphed.
A collective stream of consciousness is so much fun!
posted by Tin Man at 1:24 PM on August 26, 2003
A collective stream of consciousness is so much fun!
posted by Tin Man at 1:24 PM on August 26, 2003
He's been through the ringer (at least) once before too.
… and I've been trying to make it up to him ever since.
posted by timeistight at 1:27 PM on August 26, 2003
… and I've been trying to make it up to him ever since.
posted by timeistight at 1:27 PM on August 26, 2003
Heyheyhey now. I wasn't making fun of TCS. Apologies if it came off that way. I was genuinely curious what the deal was - No offense, please.
posted by jonson at 2:39 PM on August 26, 2003
posted by jonson at 2:39 PM on August 26, 2003
he can write almost normally if he wants to. But I like him the way he is.
posted by konolia at 4:00 PM on August 26, 2003
posted by konolia at 4:00 PM on August 26, 2003
He's been through the ringer (at least) once before too.
He has also been through the wringer at least once. thomcatspike is an acquired taste and, once you learn to translate, makes some very astute comments. Be patient.
posted by dg at 4:25 PM on August 26, 2003
He has also been through the wringer at least once. thomcatspike is an acquired taste and, once you learn to translate, makes some very astute comments. Be patient.
posted by dg at 4:25 PM on August 26, 2003
...makes some very astute comments...
totally, and sometimes he reminds me of Dos Passos, whose writing i love.
posted by amberglow at 5:27 PM on August 26, 2003
totally, and sometimes he reminds me of Dos Passos, whose writing i love.
posted by amberglow at 5:27 PM on August 26, 2003
Massive head trauma and 24/7 drunkenness--two great tastes that go great together!
And oddly enough, I usually find thomcatspike pretty easy to understand. Except when he's correcting himself, then it usually confuses the hell outta me.
posted by arto at 9:11 PM on August 26, 2003
And oddly enough, I usually find thomcatspike pretty easy to understand. Except when he's correcting himself, then it usually confuses the hell outta me.
posted by arto at 9:11 PM on August 26, 2003
the most sardonic of all pets is the wise-cracking, ass-slapping wereferret.
posted by bargle at 12:39 AM on August 27, 2003
posted by bargle at 12:39 AM on August 27, 2003
Hey! That bulldog's cheating!!
posted by timeistight at 10:02 AM on August 27, 2003
posted by timeistight at 10:02 AM on August 27, 2003
It's ok jonson, took it as a question arising from summer boredom.
\!!!/, all.
posted by thomcatspike at 8:36 AM on August 28, 2003
\!!!/, all.
posted by thomcatspike at 8:36 AM on August 28, 2003
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Maybe 111 thought this was an atypical op-ed piece?
posted by Jimbob at 7:18 PM on August 24, 2003