FPP not for settling old grudges

January 23, 2004 1:48 PM

So when did the Metafilter front page become a place to settle old grudges? Really, this is just a bit childish. Your links should speak for themselves; editorializing and playground callouts help neither you nor anyone else.
posted by deadcowdan to etiquette/policy at 1:48 PM (82 comments total)

Mayhaps mrmanley shouldn't a made no deal, then?
posted by hackly_fracture at 1:52 PM on January 23, 2004

Yes, anyone MeFite who's been proven wrong on should be publicly embarrassed for it on the front page. At least pretend to show a little objectivity, hackly--would you want to see your name in an FPP because of some hot-headed comment you wrote months ago?
posted by dhoyt at 2:07 PM on January 23, 2004

Perigee:

Tell you what -- if we haven't found unambiguous chemical and/or biological weapons in Iraq within six months of today, I will post an admission that I was wrong to you on whatever forum you desire. If we do find such weapons, I expect you to post an admission that you were wrong.

Fair enough?
posted by mrmanley at 2:08 PM PST on July 17

sounds fair enough to me , lets see the apology.
posted by sgt.serenity at 2:12 PM on January 23, 2004

Personally, given the way mrmanley made the promise, I applaud perigree for keeping track. My how six months fly by, especially when you're looking for WMD!
posted by strangeleftydoublethink at 2:13 PM on January 23, 2004

some hot-headed comment's by Bush, Cheney et al deserve prime time apologies.

What's the difference?
posted by dash_slot- at 2:17 PM on January 23, 2004

I wouldn't want to make this a common practice, as it could lead to a less robust dialectic* on mefi, but this time seems mrmanley was asking for it. So without further ado - Money? Meet Mouth.
* and yes I've been waiting all damn day to throw that in somewhere - think of it as taking one for my co-workers.
posted by elwoodwiles at 2:24 PM on January 23, 2004

I propose that matt add a grudge/callout subject option for metatalk, so all that crap can go here. Hell, that's what the grey's used for half the time anyway...
posted by Stauf at 2:34 PM on January 23, 2004

Did any one e-mail mrmanley?
posted by thomcatspike at 2:39 PM on January 23, 2004

Let's just call it Revenge of the Bean-Curd Nibblers:

from mrmanley's blog:
Thursday, July 17, 2003

Payback? | Metafilter

I really should learn not to be drawn into debates like these -- more heat than light is generated, no progress is made. It's a zero-gain enterprise. Maybe I should make it a rule: never post on MeFi's political threads.

...nah. It's too much fun baiting the bean-curd nibblers.
posted by strangeleftydoublethink at 2:42 PM on January 23, 2004

well, deadcowdan, i agree with you.

but i think you're on a losing battle. the left wing lynch mob (always a depressing idea) is on the trail. there's a whiff of testoserone in the air. eyes are glazed at the possibility of scoring a whole point against the evil empire. now that's got to make a difference!

well done guys. you made someone look a little bit silly. while keeping your own integrity shiningly intact. brilliant.
posted by andrew cooke at 2:47 PM on January 23, 2004

the left wing lynch mob (always a depressing idea) is on the trail. there's a whiff of testoserone in the air. eyes are glazed at the possibility of scoring a whole point against the evil empire.

I think the FPP demanding an apology from a specific user is a bit too far. Nevertheless, it's interesting how no one who sides with mrmanley is willing to actually point out that Perigree was right in light of mrmanley's condescending boast. Instead, it feels like the robber caught red-handed is trying to defend himself by telling the policeman he's got dog crap on his shoe.

I'm amazed at how quickly and in such quantity the pro-war posters have gathered to use sarcasm and snotty denunciations to respond to a basically simple concept of being proven wrong and asked to attone for it.

I condede that this was an uncalled-for call-out and in poor taste, even as someone who sides with Perigree. Now, does anyone who sides with mrmanley care to apologize on his behalf despite finding the request for it distasteful?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 2:55 PM on January 23, 2004

Let's say we don't do this again.
posted by The God Complex at 2:57 PM on January 23, 2004

Instead, it feels like the robber caught red-handed is trying to defend himself by telling the policeman he's got dog crap on his shoe.

It would really be more polite if you credited Dr. Phil when using analogies like that ;)

And if you think I'm apologizing on behalf of mrmanley, you're nuts. His bet in the original thread was testosterone-driven and silly, and today's response was likewise. Aka, what God Complex said.
posted by dhoyt at 3:06 PM on January 23, 2004

so when did iraq become a place to settle old grudges , by the way ?
posted by sgt.serenity at 3:07 PM on January 23, 2004

so when did iraq become a place to settle old grudges , by the way ?

[This is good.]
posted by subgenius at 3:16 PM on January 23, 2004

Since forever.
posted by dash_slot- at 3:20 PM on January 23, 2004

My problem is not so much with the idea that some of us are actually trying to keep track of stuff like this (although it really does seem pretty childish to me) but in using the front page to trumpet a "win." If mrmanley isn't actually manly enough to admit he was wrong, that's his problem. It doesn't need to be brought up in the blue, on the front page. That's not what it's there for, at least that's what I got out of reading this post.

On preview: I am NOT siding with mrmanley, so if you're thinking that, you can stop. He tried flinging some dog poop at someone else, and the wind blew it back at him and now it's all over his shirt. I can see that, you can see that, and I hope that he can see that as well. I am merely expressing a wish not to see a post on the front page with a link to a picture of mrmanley with dog poop on his shirt.
posted by deadcowdan at 3:21 PM on January 23, 2004

In my experience, wanting to humiliate someone, totally and utterly, is something more desired and done when young--showing up a fool at a party or, say, your racist uncle at a reunion--but it's like winning a shouting match: it's a fool's errand and it leaves you feeling dirty. Asking for a public apology was unnecessary. Anything more than pasting the original vow inside the thread was too much.

Paste it. Inside. That's humiliation enough. No more comment is needed.

Let's pretend it never happened.

On review: Sgt! Where's yer troosers?!
posted by y2karl at 3:27 PM on January 23, 2004

: )
posted by sgt.serenity at 3:31 PM on January 23, 2004

Anyone read the link?

I know I didn't - I am much more enthralled by the mrmanley controversy! Once again, it is what happens between people which grabs the public's eye over what happens between nations. Democracy functions properly again!
posted by Joey Michaels at 3:32 PM on January 23, 2004

Sgt! Where's yer troosers?!

And is that a sporran, or are you really glad to see someone?
posted by Shane at 3:44 PM on January 23, 2004

Pssh. The dems always try to take the high road, meanwhile the republicans take any opportunity they can to score a point. As a result, the democrats look weak and then end up losing control of government. We've all noticed this. I say call mrmanley on his bull shit, call everyone on their bull shit, and make it a policy on issues of international importance not to give anyone slack if you know they don't intend to do the same to you.

And anyway, mrmanley was acting like a total dick in that thread, and deserves to have a little crow forced down his throat.
posted by Hildago at 3:44 PM on January 23, 2004

Why do MeFites have to fight?
posted by homunculus at 3:46 PM on January 23, 2004

Anyone read the link?

Yeah. I did. In no less than 8 different news sources several hours before seeing it on MeFi, in fact. As did, I can optimistically assume, any intelligent MeFite who considers himself even casually aware of world affairs. Curiously, it didn't stop it the poster from reprinting the link on the front page with hopes of--what? Starting a flame war? Drawing attention to himself? Informing someone who hadn't already heard about Kay? Changing people's minds? Please.

"Best of the Web", indeed!
posted by dhoyt at 3:46 PM on January 23, 2004

Nyah. You're just mad cause you're wrong.
posted by Hildago at 3:53 PM on January 23, 2004

Should've been put in the comments, where snark is plentiful. Other than that, well, ask and ye shall recieve.
posted by inpHilltr8r at 4:55 PM on January 23, 2004

GrudgeFilter!

I'm there. ;-P
posted by mischief at 5:00 PM on January 23, 2004

"the right-wing?" not cool.
posted by mcsweetie at 5:08 PM on January 23, 2004

Nyah. You're just mad cause you're wrong.

About what?
posted by dhoyt at 5:14 PM on January 23, 2004

Now, does anyone who sides with mrmanley care to apologize on his behalf despite finding the request for it distasteful?

I don't know if I side with mrmanley or not, but I apologize for him. He was wrong. WMDs were not found at any point in the last 6 months. But I am willing to give him another 6 months. I mean maybe his timing was off a little.

I bet the Panthers win the Superbowl... and if they don't, I promise to apologize for being wrong. I will post an FPP apology with a picture of myself being egged while making out with a cardboard cut out of cuddley Tom Brady.
posted by Witty at 6:09 PM on January 23, 2004

Posting it as part of the front page did seem a little childish to me but I didn't even notice it till somebody else pointed it out. Neither side has an excellent track record when it comes out to childish, trollish or mean spirited behaviour though and I'm no exception (but I'm trying not to do that any more)
posted by substrate at 6:10 PM on January 23, 2004

There's nothing worse than someone who won't admit when they were wrong. Like anyone who voted for Bush. But the callout would have been better served as a comment inside the thread.
posted by rushmc at 6:22 PM on January 23, 2004

But the callout would have been better served as a comment inside the thread.

Absolutely. This is like S@L's Howard Dean is a Liar post. Topic: fair game. Inflammatory wording of FPP? Not cool at all.
posted by namespan at 7:48 PM on January 23, 2004

I would just like to say that I have never nibbled bean-curd. Like any decent American I use a suppository.
posted by jonmc at 7:55 PM on January 23, 2004

???? Childish? My ass. This is about one man being big enough to live up to his word, and someone else calling him out because he hasn't. And yet we want it formalised, sanitized and thoroughly Emily Post, so as not to offend the delicate sensibilities of anyone who finds a call to honor icky, unseemly, childish, uncool.

Good grief, people. mrmanley made a promise, he got called. There is no damn reason to debate to death your little feels about how best to facilitate the fulfillment of the deal. He other does or doesn't ... his choice. Perigee called him to pay his debt in exactly the venue and manner that mrmanley gave him the right to choose. There is absolutely no reason this should become a big community brouhaha.

Neither side has an excellent track record

This is the thinking that really irritates. This isn't about sides or track record. As I read it, one person made a pledge, not a side or a faction. Will he follow through or not? Keep your sides. I, personally, want to see the apology, period.
posted by Wulfgar! at 8:00 PM on January 23, 2004

bean curd nibblers

mrmanley. heh. "mrmanley". how ironic.

"mrmanley grappled the bear to the ground, broke it's neck, fucked the carcass, and then, using his trusty bowie knife, gutted, butchered and ate it raw."
posted by quonsar at 8:36 PM on January 23, 2004

About what?

That's pretty hard to narrow down, so let's just call it "everything" and leave it at that.
posted by eyeballkid at 8:39 PM on January 23, 2004

All dhoyt seems to be saying is that perigee's nya-nya-nya rooutine is a bit much, and he explicitly said that mrmanley's initial wager was idiotic, too. I don't see what the big deal is. But hey never let that get in the way of a good pile-on.
posted by jonmc at 8:54 PM on January 23, 2004

Wulfgar!, surely you notice the difference between bringing this issue up inside a thread (or email) and calling someone out on the front page. personally, i saw Perigee's post as a lighthearted jab (not malicious), but i can see how many (especially those not familiar with mefi) might take it differently, which is why i think anything personal doesn't belong there (think of the precedent). as far as i'm concerned there should be a strict rule of: NO PERSONAL VENDETTAS ON THE FRONT PAGE. PERIOD.

in fact, i have a big problem when people bring up their little personal squabbles inside threads when the attackee isn't even around. if you get into an argument with someone inside a thread, then fine, try to deal with it, but to attack them when their back is turned is just cowardly imo.

you don't have a problem with Perigee's post. good. but remember, this isn't your name being dragged in the mud in front of a large crowd all because of a petty feud months before.
posted by poopy at 9:38 PM on January 23, 2004

poopy, look at the very words you're using: Vendetta, squabbles, attackee, petty feud; and the phrase "name being dragged through the mud".

I agree that personal spats probably shouldn't happen on the front page of MeFi, though they do anyway and they're some of the most entertaining moments on MeFi to date. That is not what happened here. One person made a promise, a challenge. Another took him at his word. If any wish to view that as a good name being drug through mud, than I say that they better look again, because the name is Mud; lies and the lying liars who tell them and all that.

What got me a bit tweaked was the number of people who A) want some kind of proper form, as if there is any for this kind of thing (the challenge was made and accepted, and payment called due ... and others don't like the form of it ... WTF?) B) the willingness to forget and excuse from responsibility mrmanley's express claim that his apology would be given in the forum/venue of his opponents choice.

The gauntlet was thrown down, picked up, the duel played out and the debt is owed. There shouldn't be any interferance, whining, or namby-pamby excuses from ANY of the rest of us here. There is no difference that need be noticed. If you make a bet, pay up. Its that simple.
posted by Wulfgar! at 10:26 PM on January 23, 2004

"If you make a bet, pay up. Its that simple."

*rises to feet, applauds, whistles*
posted by mr_crash_davis at 10:35 PM on January 23, 2004

"If you make a bet, pay up. Its that simple."

Fuck that, don't make any bets where you promise to piss all over the front page.

And when the said loser fails to relieve his bladder all over the front page you sure as fuck don't whip it out and spray it down yourself.

Matt goes away to a funeral and it's like Lord of the Flies around here.

GROW UP!
posted by Mick at 10:44 PM on January 23, 2004

No disrespect, I think you're all wrong. Perigee, rather than carrying out any grudge, humorously made a reference which is not only affectionate in its memory of a fellow member's comment but also a universal and very human comment on how time-bound our certainties are.

I have a fairly good idea of Perigee's posting history (and the best impression possible) and the very idea that he'd go against MetaFilter's tacit "first principles" in order to make a cheap shot is laughable to me.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 11:44 PM on January 23, 2004

GROW UP!

Rather twisted sense of the juvenile you have in my opinion, Mick. Care to explain your little outburst? I don't remember any wagers concerning urination, nor any urination from the winners of those bets, which I simply haven't read. And I don't know anything about Matt attending funerals, though I'd wager he's going to urinate while he's away. We're human, and that happens.

If you're going to go all Sergeant Rock Authority on our asses, would you please explain just what the f*ck you're screaming about? I looked through the thread in question, where mrmanley made his bet, and I just don't see your parental guidance there, Mick. Not one peep about bladder control or urinary disfunction. So help us out, would you? Is there some supplement we can take that will help us all toe the line vis'a'vis liquid bodily waste? Is quonsar's elephant somehow involved in the yellow snow cabal against which you rail? I'm just not getting your point, here.

perhaps MetaFilter needs some kind of Depends adult diapers. Do you care to suggest a method of symptom control here?
posted by Wulfgar! at 12:11 AM on January 24, 2004

It's good to know that some people are still upholding the values of integrity and responsibility that the god-damned liberals are trying so hard to destroy.
posted by Hildago at 12:24 AM on January 24, 2004

I thought it was funny too when I first saw it, although if i were Matt I'd delete it - whatever "bet" was made, the front page of metafilter is not either mrmanley or Perigee's personal wagering chip. And its silly and childish. poopy made some good points.

To illustrate:
Acceptable bet: If I lose, I will give you $50 or I will post an apology on my personal weblog.
Unacceptable: If I lose, I will give you the deed to Wulfgar!'s house or I will deface the front page of metafilter.com

In the latter cases, these are not my things to wager.
posted by vacapinta at 12:25 AM on January 24, 2004

Yeah, I'll bet!
posted by y2karl at 1:44 AM on January 24, 2004

quit playin the chivalry card will ya ? it's gettin like the crusades in here.
posted by sgt.serenity at 2:04 AM on January 24, 2004

Cartoonish, vainglorious wrongness - mesmerizing, innit? - rewind and play it again, Perigree - split screen and in tempo with Kruschev's shoe.
posted by Opus Dark at 3:02 AM on January 24, 2004

If you're going to make a post related to Iraq, please reconsider, as the topic has been discussed previously many times.

Just to be clear: the point of MetaFilter is to find the best and most interesting of the web to share with others
posted by fuzz at 5:27 AM on January 24, 2004

m(olehill) ^ m(ountain)
posted by mischief at 8:18 AM on January 24, 2004

IF anyone here is over-passionate about this "bet", that doesn't fucking mean anything, it seems to be you Wulfgar!. You're acting like mrmanley is the governor of Missouri or something... as if he matters, his opinion, his bets, etc. So why don't you calm down.

Pretend that this whole thing isn't about a bet. Pretend that it's about an issue that you can't take sides on. Calling someone out in an FPP isn't right. It's bad form for MeFi... that's all this thread is about. It's not about Bush or WMDs. That's what the blue thread is for.

If you allow this form of rebuttal to take place, then you may see more of it, and a "bet" won't even be necessary. If a missile were found tomorrow, could I post a thread and say, "Missile found in Iraq. Thumbnuts like Wulfy and Foldy won't be happy about this." OR maybe, "Tofu is now illegal. What will soyjoy do now?" Get it?
posted by Witty at 9:53 AM on January 24, 2004

Ahh, the dreaded and ever shunned slippery slope. The blue is deepening ... what will we do? Nothing. Not our job, not our place.

Its people who present your pleas for sanity that are taking this way too seriously, Witty. As I've indicated several times, its a simple thing ... not the death of MetaFilter as we know it.

You really need to tighten up the argument, though, 'cause you're kinda all over the map here. It matters, it doesn't matter, mrmanley isn't a political figure, and some how or another, in a written medium, I'm acting. When I was able to piece it all together, this is what I think I'm getting:

That it is more dreadful to hold someone in this forum accountable for what they write than it is to discount what is said for the betterment of the community. Isn't that a strange parallel for the current state of national debate? I'd say that's worth taking a look at, but your milage might vary, of course.

Finally, I'm a bit confused by your assumptions concerning my emotional state here. I'm not the one who popped a cork and started screaming at people to "GROW UP!" (Heh, which is the Metafilter equivalent of saying "shut up, please; your ideas are a danger to my mind and the community as I see it and must be stopped", I guess) If you take a look at my participation in this thread, I'd like to think you'll see a little humor, the smile on my face, at exactly what you deride me for, that others are taking this oh so very serious.

So lets review: Should people here be accountable for what they say? I think so. Is the community in moral danger if that call for accountability gets posted to the blue? I think not. Does Witty need to calm down in telling Wulfgar to calm down? I think that's pretty clear by now.
posted by Wulfgar! at 10:20 AM on January 24, 2004

Remarkably, even after this cataclysmic event rocked the world of metafilter, ruining the community, and scouring the finish off our gleaming front page standards, people continued to post and comment as normal in every other thread.
posted by Hildago at 11:12 AM on January 24, 2004

I read MetaTalk before MetaFilter today. From all the hullabaloo in this thread I thought that the FPP poster had gone really over-the-top in ragging on Manley.

Turns out it was a simple "yoohoo, gonna live up to your promise?" prodding.

My gods. Much ado about absolutely nothing, all this!
posted by five fresh fish at 11:35 AM on January 24, 2004

Also, it looks like the thread disintegration was started and continued by dhoyt, aided and abetted by a series of people who insisted on baiting him.
posted by five fresh fish at 11:41 AM on January 24, 2004

Matt goes away to a funeral and it's like Lord of the Flies around here.

You can just smell the absence of supervision. Nobody has seen Simon lately, either.
posted by hama7 at 11:53 AM on January 24, 2004

If Matt comes back from his funeral, I swear I'm going to start a religion.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:52 PM on January 24, 2004

YEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!
posted by quonsar at 11:20 PM on January 24, 2004

/sticks earplugs in ears, flicks safety off
posted by namespan at 11:45 PM on January 24, 2004

Who comes back from their funeral?
posted by trondant at 11:49 AM on January 25, 2004

Exactly.

Matt Is Risen Again! All Hail Matt!
posted by five fresh fish at 11:51 AM on January 25, 2004

Yeah, you say that now. But wait until every comment of his is the same:

"Brains. Braaaiiiinnnnss."
posted by Wulfgar! at 12:13 PM on January 25, 2004

"Brains. Braaaiiiinnnnss."

Most of us are safe then.
posted by Mick at 1:04 PM on January 25, 2004

Give me the Brain!
posted by five fresh fish at 1:34 PM on January 25, 2004

I have a fairly good idea of Perigee's posting history (and the best impression possible) and the very idea that he'd go against MetaFilter's tacit "first principles" in order to make a cheap shot is laughable to me.

can non-US citizens (portugese) be appointed to the supreme court? ... if so, i have a suggestion for president kerry. :)
posted by specialk420 at 4:47 PM on January 25, 2004

Considering mrmanley hasn't made a post since August, I wouldn't wait on that apology. It's no comment on his character that he hasn't responded, since it's likely he didn't even read the post (although I'm sure someone has emailed him a note), and now apparently has better things to do than check out this site.

For me, it beats working.

Yes, the callout should have been a little less gratuitous, but it wasn't worth all this, surely?
posted by GhostintheMachine at 7:01 AM on January 26, 2004

Considering mrmanley hasn't made a post since [it started to become abundantly clear that the justification for this war was a complete and total hoax], I wouldn't wait on that apology.

Hey, can Macboy apologize on behalf of MrManley?
posted by soyjoy at 8:30 AM on January 26, 2004

Wulfgar! Admittedly, this response is a bit dated, but I still feel as though I should give it a try. Here is my point, as best I can state it.

mrmanley and his opinions, ideas, thoughts, suggestions, and/or bets mean very little in the grand scope of things. It seems very silly to me that ANYone on this site should be so adamant in their demands to see an apology from the guy.

This whole "holding people accountable" playhouse game is equally as silly. If mrmanley were a member of the crew that decided to go to war based on evidence of WMDs that proved to be wrong, then I can understand the uproar if his apology never materialized. But who is mrmanley? What will his "apology" really do for you or anyone else for that matter? I mean were talking about some random guy that thought WMDs would be found by now and he was wrong. So what. I very much doubt mrmanley was the first person to ever post the words "I bet". But really, I don't care one way or another about him, his bet, or his lack of an apology.. or how anyone here feels about not getting one.

It's just as laughable to hear all this "we must hold him accountable... we demand a apology" bullshit.

The second point is... MeTa, as you well know, is the proper forum for discussing MeFi etiquette and form. That's the point of this thread. Should it be ok for someone to callout another member on the front page? In my worthless opinion, no. "Slippery slope" is a bit of an excessive term to apply here, but I do believe that if you let this one slide, you create an opportunity for someone to do it again, and so on. Now if Matt and the rest of the collective don't think it's a problem, then so be it.
posted by Witty at 9:43 AM on January 26, 2004

For what its worth, I never expected, not once, that we would ever hear peep one from mrmanley. Furthermore, I don't think anyone took it seriously enough to "demand" an apology; Perigee did come closest to that, as was his right to do. As I pointed out in my first comment in this thread, it is mrmanley's choice to speak up or not, regardless of any of the rest of us caterwauling over venue, or niceties, or politeness, or maturity level of the principals in the matter.

This is the heart of where I was coming from here:

There shouldn't be any interferance, whining, or namby-pamby excuses from ANY of the rest of us here.

As for accountability, if you take a look at what I wrote, you'll find that I was reacting to those who wanted to forget that mrmanley invited just such a thing as what Perigee wrote. To kevetch now that we need to keep such calls for payment off the blue is a little silly given that that's exactly what mrmanley called for. Where was the outcry then from the "we must save MetaFilter" crowd? As for tying him down on an anthill, covering him with honey, and forcing a confession of his WMD wrongness, I've already indicated that that's not our job, not your's, mine or MetaFilter's. Unless you work for rather unsavory folks, its not likely that you can force someone to pay a bet. But you can hold them accountable for what they've said. If anybody wants to howl about Perigee's faux pax, they'd best go to the source, and blame mrmanley.

Am I being more clear than I was before?
posted by Wulfgar! at 11:33 AM on January 26, 2004

This is what you said earlier:
Should people here be accountable for what they say? I think so.

I agree, but to a point. I mean people should (and hopefully) say what they meanand mean what they say. But...

To kevetch now that we need to keep such calls for payment off the blue is a little silly given that that's exactly what mrmanley called for.

Sure, but that doesn't mean that he (or anyone else for that matter) can decide how to "use" metafilter for that purpose. Just because mrmanley was asking for it, doesn't mean we should use the front page for the call-out and/or the apology. Again, I'm merely speaking against the idea that the front page is the proper place, despite the fact that mrmanley asked for it. It's not his right to make those decisions. This thread was created to ask that question... "is it cool or not cool to make a call-out in an FFP". My opinion is no. Is it cool to make the call-out WITHIN the thread itself, perhaps... yes. Is it cool to expext an apology? If you think it will make you feel better, fine. "You" being the understood you, not YOU you.

I got involved in this discussion because I thought it was silly how some people seemed to be letting their opinion that he should apologize (which I still think is sad) override whether or not they thought doing so in an FPP was proper or not.
posted by Witty at 12:32 PM on January 26, 2004

Heyya, Guys. Sorry for being a little late to the game.

Here's the way I saw it, why I did it, and why, to this moment, I pretty much defend it.

A whole bunch of people who are detractors of the post agree that "He tried flinging some dog poop at someone else, and the wind blew it back at him and now it's all over his shirt."

Well... if the post hadn't come, than there would be no wind to blow it back, and nothing on his shirt. This would signal to me that anyone can blow off any sort of crud as gospel-truth, swear up their reputation with any kind of high-blown claim, and then walk away, after people forget in time.

Happens in politics all the time. It's happening right now, with the WMDS - these two events mirror each other.

Now, against the better tastes of some, I have brought to book the boasts of another. A position he chose to ante up with a bet.

A bet he has chosen not to honor.

mrmanley now has no credibility at all. His boast was what it was; in choosing not to honor it, he has shown his character in full. I would have respected him, had he shown the guts to apologize - as I would have apologized. But he proved himself out. Who here, on either side, will be able to take him as anything more than a troll now?

He chose the means, then he chose his course of action, and now he is revealed. If the means of that revelation are distateful to some... I can only say that no other way would have brought as complete an unveiling.

I made a bet there, too. Not six months ago - 3 days ago. Think about it, folks - if he had come in and apologized, I would have looked like a class-1 assho. I chose to take the chance, because I knew my enemy, and the way he would respond.

And yes, I take a certain amount of pride in the fact that he has chosen to represent those who would lie and delude, and then shrank away in the light of day. I want that parallel to be noticed.

I want to see that bet called on a national level.

I want to see if the mrmanley in the whitehouse is more manley than the one who played him in the blue.

I am willing to be defined by my actions, including the post in the blue. I will call to book, when the time comes. I won't forget. I won't pass it over. I'd have done the same thing, were I democrat or republican, christian or muslim. In the same way that I am willing to be called to book when wrong. There are those of you that know that, having come to an equitable parting of the ways in other threads.

And I'm especially glad that in defining myself, mrmanley defined himself as well.

That's one more down.
posted by Perigee at 2:03 PM on January 26, 2004

Where would be without you, Perigee? All hail !!!

Are there other claims people have made that you're keeping track of... ones that we'll see you reveal on the front page for all of us to marvel at again?

And you may want to read this post, perhaps again, before you judge mrmanley any further.

That's one more down.

That's sad.
posted by Witty at 3:05 PM on January 26, 2004

Witty, if you and I have a point of disagreement, it is this. mrmanley judged himself, whether he's around to pony up or not. Makes no nevermind or howdydoo to the grand schema of life, but I certainly wouldn't fault Perigee for a small bit of WooHoo.

Are there other claims people have made that you're keeping track of... ones that we'll see you reveal on the front page for all of us to marvel at again?

I'm personally looking forward to that pic of you givin' tongue to the cardboard Tom Brady.

Seriously ... GO Panthers!!!
posted by Wulfgar! at 3:33 PM on January 26, 2004

It would have been better if the guy still posted here and you'd waited until he started talking nonsense about the war in another thread.

He chose the means, then he chose his course of action, and now he is revealed. If the means of that revelation are distateful to some... I can only say that no other way would have brought as complete an unveiling.

Delusions of grandeur much? My god, you act like you knocked out George Foreman--or his political equivalent--and not some nobody in a six-month old debate. If we wasted everybody's time with every single "nyah" on this site, we'd end up looking like a goddamn usenet group. There's likely been five thousand instances on this site where two people have argued over a point; sure, in this case he happened to make a stupid let's-have-a-pissing-contest bet, but you should have had the common sense to realize it wasn't a fight worth persuing.

I didn't care much for the jab, but it didn't seem like too big of a deal. Your further elaboration, however, marks you as one who doesn't take victory with a whole lot of grace.

I chose to take the chance, because I knew my enemy, and the way he would respond.

Couldn't have just quietly marked it up on your chalkboard of victories over shameful cowards who challenged the beast and left us all out of it?

I am willing to be defined by my actions, including the post in the blue. I will call to book, when the time comes. I won't forget. I won't pass it over. I'd have done the same thing, were I democrat or republican, christian or muslim. In the same way that I am willing to be called to book when wrong. There are those of you that know that, having come to an equitable parting of the ways in other threads.

This isn't a debate club. Keep it in the thread and keep it in your pants.
posted by The God Complex at 3:34 PM on January 26, 2004

perigree , youre absolutely right to demand your apology from mr manley, a bets a bet and just you keep asking for it , dont let all these right wingers tell you any different.
A republican apologising for talking a load of nonsense in metafilter would be surely be the mark of some sort of golden age.
You guys have filled this site with right wing lies for years and now you're talking about one guy lowering this sites impeccable 'standard' cause he asks for an apology which he was promised ?
posted by sgt.serenity at 4:12 PM on January 26, 2004

When your actions chalk up 75 comments in MeTalk, TGC, you feel disposed to bring yourself in to answer for the mess you make.

That's personal responsibility.

Or are you suggesting the best course of action in Meta Talk is not to come in and answer for my actions? I haven't turned Republican yet.

You're absolutely right, in a way - I don't take my victories with a great deal of grace. Not when I'm backed up the wall after I achieve them.

And further, you're right about it being better if I just waited for him to show up. But there are a few subjects that I get a serious bee in my bonnet about, and this particular one is one of 'em. A lot of dead people because of those WMDs. A lot of American tax money out the window. A lot of national debt rung up. And a lot more to come.

I don't know about delusions of granduer. I do know a lot about anger, and frustration, and disgust, and probably a bunch of moral self-righteousness too. Any way you slice it, I have had that Republican promise - and, if you think back, it wasn't just mrmanley's stance, it was also the administration's line - flashing up every time somebody else blew up, got shot out of the sky and sniped out on the streets. I admit it completely - I've been waiting to call bullshit on this for far longer than I should have had to. But they wanted the time. They had it. And I was definitely ready to call it down.

And finally, the question of silence. I can't see it, even now. There's an old maxim that "silence implies consent," and this is one subject I am just not ready to allow to pass quietly. dhoyt would have preferred it, but then dhoyt's political record explains why. Witty has a problem - but then, looking back on Witty's written record says a lot too. If they have a case of sour grapes, it's due to the fermentation.

This isn't a debate club. Keep it in the thread and keep it in your pants."

If it's not a debate club, than we're a pretty sorry excuse for a garden club. Seems like there's not much fire in a unanimous 'good link!' or 'My thoughts are with the poor dead guy' post. Frankly, if we were completely trapped into innumberable "Issac Asimov Covers" Or "Ikea Walkthroughs" here, most of the folks here would be gnawing the plasterboard out of sheer boredom.

This wasn't exactly a love in, with 99 responses yesterday... the 123 posts brought in by two election posts weren't a round of Kum-Bay-yah.

You want me to keep from engaging in debate? I will... if they will.
posted by Perigee at 4:48 PM on January 26, 2004

If you make a bet, pay up. Its that simple.
Word. The whole brouhaha above is way out of proportion to the size of the bet, but the principle still stands - don't wager what you can't (or won't) deliver. If you lose, be man enough to front up and keep your word.

The question would have been better placed inside the thread, though.
posted by dg at 8:01 PM on January 26, 2004

What dg said.

Has anybody tried e-mailing mrmanley yet?
posted by languagehat at 8:04 AM on January 27, 2004

Word. The whole brouhaha above is way out of proportion to the size of the bet...

Right... that because THIS THREAD ISN'T ABOUT THE BET. And if anyone actually bothers to track mrmanley down, then I really feel sorry for the lot of you.
posted by Witty at 10:02 AM on January 27, 2004

i am mr manley , and i am willing to negotiate.
posted by sgt.serenity at 1:54 PM on January 27, 2004

~snark~ Hidin' in a spiderhole, with a playboy and a set of "Bicycle" playin cards... sendin' lil' cassette tapes out - "I predict they'll find an atomic bazooka, and I shall be vindicated!"

In the meanwhile, all the tighty-rightys screaming, "It's unconsty-tootional! Unconsty-tootional, I say!' 'Leave him in Peeeeeeece!'

Poetic. I LOVE life.
posted by Perigee at 2:18 PM on January 27, 2004