Politics out of AskMe January 18, 2004 9:21 PM Subscribe
Can we please keep politics off AskMetaFilter?
I can understand your objections, timeistight and TGC but, in this case, for someone who follows American politics quite closely, this was quite clearly a question I needed help on (impossible to satisfy otherwise) and, thanks to the thoughtful, intelligent and admirably neutral way the answers were framed and given (understanding that this was a non-domestic issue, with great importance to non-voting non-Americans), I learnt more in a couple of hours than years of reading the NYT, WP, NR and what have you.
If it's deleted, may I thank all the kind fellows who were able to detach themselves in order to see a foreigners' viewpoint and fully respond to his query? This is clearly a non-Googleable question, heavily dependent on users' expertise and savvy, and if it's political, I think it's been admirably answered, with great independence and "nous".
posted by MiguelCardoso at 10:34 PM on January 18, 2004
If it's deleted, may I thank all the kind fellows who were able to detach themselves in order to see a foreigners' viewpoint and fully respond to his query? This is clearly a non-Googleable question, heavily dependent on users' expertise and savvy, and if it's political, I think it's been admirably answered, with great independence and "nous".
posted by MiguelCardoso at 10:34 PM on January 18, 2004
oh for christs sake... posts last for about 45 minutes on askmeta ... and are oh so much easier to skip if the topic in question is of no interest to you. it was nice to see the question from miguel - and despite some of the usual back and forth, a good thread ensued.
posted by specialk420 at 11:10 PM on January 18, 2004
posted by specialk420 at 11:10 PM on January 18, 2004
oh for christs sake... posts last for about 45 minutes on askmeta ...askmeta ... and are oh so much easier to skip if the topic in question is of no interest to you.
It isn't that you can't skip the occasional problem post. It's that it's a terrible precedent.
If this one remains up, should I follow it up with "Who should I root for in the superbowl? [more inside]."
More frivolous, yes, more subjective, no.
posted by weston at 11:16 PM on January 18, 2004
It isn't that you can't skip the occasional problem post. It's that it's a terrible precedent.
If this one remains up, should I follow it up with "Who should I root for in the superbowl? [more inside]."
More frivolous, yes, more subjective, no.
posted by weston at 11:16 PM on January 18, 2004
I can understand your objections, timeistight and TGC but, in this case, for someone who follows American politics quite closely, this was quite clearly a question I needed help on (impossible to satisfy otherwise)
I was being as sarcastic as possible, making light of what seems to be a preference by some on metafilter to keep things to the inane technical realm of choices. I certainly wouldn't want a glut of political posts, but one as straightforward and broad as a summary of American politics doesn't seem too far out there for my tastes.
posted by The God Complex at 12:13 AM on January 19, 2004
I was being as sarcastic as possible, making light of what seems to be a preference by some on metafilter to keep things to the inane technical realm of choices. I certainly wouldn't want a glut of political posts, but one as straightforward and broad as a summary of American politics doesn't seem too far out there for my tastes.
posted by The God Complex at 12:13 AM on January 19, 2004
If this one remains up, should I follow it up with "Who should I root for in the superbowl? [more inside]."
Who cares now that Philly and Indy are out? It's too bad Donovan hurt his ribs on that late hit in the first half.
posted by The God Complex at 12:13 AM on January 19, 2004
Who cares now that Philly and Indy are out? It's too bad Donovan hurt his ribs on that late hit in the first half.
posted by The God Complex at 12:13 AM on January 19, 2004
OMFG! WE MADE A PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO ASK QUESTIONS AND THEY ARE DOING IT BUT I DON'T LIKE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS. WTF?!? HOW CAN THIS BE FIXED?
posted by quonsar at 2:33 AM on January 19, 2004
posted by quonsar at 2:33 AM on January 19, 2004
US politics is like kudzu – if we let it in, it'll choke out everything else.
posted by timeistight at 2:39 AM on January 19, 2004
posted by timeistight at 2:39 AM on January 19, 2004
so, why *is* dubyuh such a corrupt, fascist, jeebus-humping bastage anyway? [MI]
posted by quonsar at 2:40 AM on January 19, 2004
posted by quonsar at 2:40 AM on January 19, 2004
My personal preference would be to keep AskMe as open as possible in terms of the sorts of questions that can be asked, though I don't think Matt likes the idea of rhetorical questions that cannot actually be answered and are posed mostly in order to stimulate conversation. But I can see where certain political questions could be helpful... Why should I spend a great deal of time researching who the best U.S. "green candidate" might be, for instance, when I'm sure that troutfishing, for example, probably has all that information at his fingertips?
To me, more important than suppressing political queries on AskMe would be suppressing political answers to questions that aren't political.
posted by taz at 3:31 AM on January 19, 2004
To me, more important than suppressing political queries on AskMe would be suppressing political answers to questions that aren't political.
posted by taz at 3:31 AM on January 19, 2004
I don't think Matt likes the idea of rhetorical questions that cannot actually be answered and are posed mostly in order to stimulate conversation.
Nor do I, for what it's worth, at least on AskMe. Over a few dozen cocktails, sure, I'm all for conversation-as-collaborative-entertainment rather than confrontation or Q&A.
Still, it's a pretty damn fine line, innit?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:20 AM on January 19, 2004
Nor do I, for what it's worth, at least on AskMe. Over a few dozen cocktails, sure, I'm all for conversation-as-collaborative-entertainment rather than confrontation or Q&A.
Still, it's a pretty damn fine line, innit?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:20 AM on January 19, 2004
Root for Carolina.
Now, that wasn't that hard, was it?
posted by konolia at 4:29 AM on January 19, 2004
Now, that wasn't that hard, was it?
posted by konolia at 4:29 AM on January 19, 2004
I agree with you stav, because while it's obviously fun, light conversation is far too tempting, and real answers would soon be buried amid the playtime chatter.
posted by taz at 5:03 AM on January 19, 2004
posted by taz at 5:03 AM on January 19, 2004
+taz, I too think that is M@tt's intent. BTW, what's a superbowl? [MI]
posted by mischief at 5:58 AM on January 19, 2004
posted by mischief at 5:58 AM on January 19, 2004
mischief, a superbowl is just a really great bowl - high sides so your soup doesn't slurp out, bright and cheerful for your morning cereal; oven, microwave and dishwasher safe. And really, really big.
posted by taz at 6:14 AM on January 19, 2004
posted by taz at 6:14 AM on January 19, 2004
thus miguels question gets banished a netherworld ... too much of a direct question for the frontpage, and unlikely to get a complete answer, or cause a derail, if slipped into a given thread ... what if someone had a question about portugese politics and who the best candidate was for whatever reason? off-limits?
posted by specialk420 at 7:21 AM on January 19, 2004
posted by specialk420 at 7:21 AM on January 19, 2004
US politics is like kudzu – if we let it in, it'll choke out everything else.
posted by timeistight at 2:39 AM PST on January 19
timeistight: why?
posted by nthdegx at 3:01 AM PST on January 19
That's what happened to MetaFilter.
posted by timeistight at 8:25 AM on January 19, 2004
posted by timeistight at 2:39 AM PST on January 19
timeistight: why?
posted by nthdegx at 3:01 AM PST on January 19
That's what happened to MetaFilter.
posted by timeistight at 8:25 AM on January 19, 2004
I think Miguel's question is a borderline one. The "who should we root for" aspect is overtly political, and that makes it a bad question, but the underlying information he's looking for is valid, and would have been just fine, I think, if it had been phrased better. ("What are the candidates' views with regard to cooperation with other first-world countries?")
Questions looking for information about politics are fine, IMO, as long as the question is phrased in a politically neutral way.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 9:03 AM on January 19, 2004
Questions looking for information about politics are fine, IMO, as long as the question is phrased in a politically neutral way.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 9:03 AM on January 19, 2004
I think Miguel's question is a borderline one
no it's not. it's Miguel's trademark "what's your favorite ____?" post. only this time it was about politics -- even the Mighty Cardoso, usually not very excited by political threads, is running out of topics, apparently. he just wanted to chat about a still-nonexistent topic, ie Democratic Primary candidates' ideas about Europe and US commitment around the world. we all remember how Bush in '00 was the "disengagement" candidate, and we all saw how that idea turned out. so it's very unlikely that running around Iowa and New Hampshire the candidates are giving now much thought to Miguel's request. and we all saw how everybody mentioned a different candidate.
hence, useless thread, but Miguel had -- again -- his little chatroom, for once about US politics. mathowie doesn't seem to be against the MetaChatroom slant to Miguel's posting style, so I guess we're beating a very badly decomposed horse here
posted by matteo at 9:57 AM on January 19, 2004
no it's not. it's Miguel's trademark "what's your favorite ____?" post. only this time it was about politics -- even the Mighty Cardoso, usually not very excited by political threads, is running out of topics, apparently. he just wanted to chat about a still-nonexistent topic, ie Democratic Primary candidates' ideas about Europe and US commitment around the world. we all remember how Bush in '00 was the "disengagement" candidate, and we all saw how that idea turned out. so it's very unlikely that running around Iowa and New Hampshire the candidates are giving now much thought to Miguel's request. and we all saw how everybody mentioned a different candidate.
hence, useless thread, but Miguel had -- again -- his little chatroom, for once about US politics. mathowie doesn't seem to be against the MetaChatroom slant to Miguel's posting style, so I guess we're beating a very badly decomposed horse here
posted by matteo at 9:57 AM on January 19, 2004
I have to agree with DevilsAdvocate and, despite the humiliation, with Matteo. When he says "he just wanted to chat about a still-nonexistent topic, ie Democratic Primary candidates' ideas about Europe and US commitment around the world" I dispute the "wanting to chat" part but I have to suspect he's quite right about the "nonexistent topic".
The question was indeed badly framed (specially the choice of words "root for") although the answers were on the button and enlightening, given the sloppy question. The original thought was "what Democratic candidate is best for Europeans?" and, although sincere, I guess it can't be answered by those who have a stake in it.
Ultimately, timeistight is right. Though I do think AskMe, if the question is properly put, can do politics well - if it's about information, rather than opinion.
So - yes, sorry...
posted by MiguelCardoso at 10:17 AM on January 19, 2004
The question was indeed badly framed (specially the choice of words "root for") although the answers were on the button and enlightening, given the sloppy question. The original thought was "what Democratic candidate is best for Europeans?" and, although sincere, I guess it can't be answered by those who have a stake in it.
Ultimately, timeistight is right. Though I do think AskMe, if the question is properly put, can do politics well - if it's about information, rather than opinion.
So - yes, sorry...
posted by MiguelCardoso at 10:17 AM on January 19, 2004
only this time it was about politics -- even the Mighty Cardoso, usually not very excited by political threads, is running out of topics, apparently.
JINKS.
heh, i was just thinking that miguel never, well, hardly ever enters the political threads let alone post them which i thought was, well, now I'm not sure.
"I would like to register a complaint."
"But you're a kid."
"Yeah, but that's a different complaint."
posted by clavdivs at 10:31 AM on January 19, 2004
JINKS.
heh, i was just thinking that miguel never, well, hardly ever enters the political threads let alone post them which i thought was, well, now I'm not sure.
"I would like to register a complaint."
"But you're a kid."
"Yeah, but that's a different complaint."
posted by clavdivs at 10:31 AM on January 19, 2004
I don't think Matt likes the idea of rhetorical questions that cannot actually be answered and are posed mostly in order to stimulate conversation.
Are the what's-the-best-home-theater threads any different?
If we limit it to questions that can be answered, it's going to end up being a lame forum for random tech support: ____ is wrong with my browser: why?
posted by The God Complex at 12:11 PM on January 19, 2004
Are the what's-the-best-home-theater threads any different?
If we limit it to questions that can be answered, it's going to end up being a lame forum for random tech support: ____ is wrong with my browser: why?
posted by The God Complex at 12:11 PM on January 19, 2004
at least we can begin to detect the outline of miggy's business plan:
1] make dubious post
2] agree with those who complain
3] apologise
4] profit!!!!!!!!!!!
posted by quonsar at 12:11 PM on January 19, 2004
1] make dubious post
2] agree with those who complain
3] apologise
4] profit!!!!!!!!!!!
posted by quonsar at 12:11 PM on January 19, 2004
at least we can begin to detect the outline of miggy's business plan:
Self-flagellation is a multi-tens-of-dollars business right now, Chafferty. One can hardly blame him.
posted by The God Complex at 12:31 PM on January 19, 2004
Self-flagellation is a multi-tens-of-dollars business right now, Chafferty. One can hardly blame him.
posted by The God Complex at 12:31 PM on January 19, 2004
*throttles the quonz with his bare hands, whilst using his spare legs to kickbox TGC's shins repeatedly*
posted by MiguelCardoso at 12:37 PM on January 19, 2004
posted by MiguelCardoso at 12:37 PM on January 19, 2004
no self-respecting kickboxer would ever use the word "whilst".
"muthafucka", yes.
"pencilneck", by all means.
"whilst", no.
posted by matteo at 2:17 PM on January 19, 2004
"muthafucka", yes.
"pencilneck", by all means.
"whilst", no.
posted by matteo at 2:17 PM on January 19, 2004
Do not mess with the gramatically astute kickboxers, matteo. Anybody who can fight like that and still retain powers of speech has layed down repeated whoopass after whoopass whilst never taking a blow to the head, you down?
posted by namespan at 5:08 PM on January 19, 2004
posted by namespan at 5:08 PM on January 19, 2004
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by The God Complex at 9:36 PM on January 18, 2004