May 14, 2001

12:59 AM

If it would be too much to trouble to implement, no big deal, mathowie, but how about requiring a scroll down the posting guidelines page before someone posts their first link to MeFi? Some of the discussions on MetaTalk lately indicate that first-time posters aren't really aware of the guidelines, and maybe this might head off many of the threads that you delete outrightpage before someone posts their first link to MeFi?

Some of the discussions on MetaTalk lately indicate that first-time posters aren't really aware of the guidelines, and maybe this might head off many of the threads that you delete outright.
posted by lia to feature requests at 12:59 AM (8 comments total)

The Motley Fool uses a tasteful popup (oxymoron??). Post to any board for the first time and you'll see it. Of course, with Metafilter, one cookie sweep and you'll get it all over again. The Fool persists data on the server side.
posted by fooljay at 1:07 AM on May 14, 2001

Who sweeps their cookies, anyway? Paranoids.

But I digress... Lia, I haven't signed up for a MeFi account since, well, whenever I did this one. But I do know that new members are taken to the lengthy new member page that details the principles behind the posting guidelines. And there's a prominent link on that page to the About page as well as the guidelines themselves.

They're also required to click on a link that says "Ok, I'd like to contribute something meaningful to the community..."

If they don't get the message after all that, they're just plain not reading. Which would explain why they don't "get" MeFi.
posted by anildash at 2:04 AM on May 14, 2001

Like anil pointed out, I've written a lot more for the guidelines and such, but I don't think people are reading it or it's not sinking in. I could link to some comment guidelines on comment pages or before someone posts a comment, but I don't have anything specific to say about comment conduct (when you go to a party, is there a page or two of rules posted on the wall, or do you just look around and figure out what is acceptable behavior). I'm also tired of writing down everything, once you start making a few rules, you have to make more rules, and more rules, and then people complain when they're out of line because there wasn't a specific rule that was broken, so you just have to write more rules.

I think the problem is that people just aren't reading or caring.

What are words for when no one listens anymore...
posted by mathowie at 10:40 AM on May 14, 2001

I've written a lot more for the guidelines

The more you write, the less people read...
posted by kindall at 2:25 PM on May 14, 2001

Who sweeps their cookies, anyway? Paranoids.

Not only that but I have my browser prompt me for all cookies and I actually look at the information.

I may be paranoid, but that doesn't mean they're not out to get me... ;-)
posted by fooljay at 3:17 PM on May 14, 2001

I do that too. It's actually pretty enetertaining, watching sites try cookie after cookie and getting to say "no, no, no, no, no. . . " I've had sites try to set as many as NINE cookies on a single page. (I do say yes sometimes.)

Anil, when my IE (Mac) crashes, it often takes the cookie file with it. It's not always a deliberate thing.
posted by rodii at 4:41 PM on May 14, 2001

Rodii, I'm familiar with the MacIE cookie crash thing, and I know I've done enough reinstalls/upgrades/downgrades to lose cookies here and there. I'm just ceaselessly amazed at how seriously people take these little things.

But I tend to be overly dismissive of those things, maybe because I probably encounter cookies as often as webmaster as I do as a surfer.
posted by anildash at 7:55 PM on May 14, 2001

I have to sweep my cookies regularily, since we use them for our site at work and if I don't test without them, I'm apt to miss a stupid bug.

Sure, I could just delete our cookies, but it's so much easier to kill them all. Well, up until I have to relogin all over the place I guess.
posted by cCranium at 10:45 AM on May 15, 2001