Double-chill al-double-ready

June 7, 2004 9:09 PM

I know I'm probably asking for it, but I don't understand the bile that comes with double-posts, or even posts that some people are already familiar with (even if it's not a double-post).
posted by o2b to Etiquette/Policy at 9:09 PM (40 comments total)

The 17 million vibrating broom posts a while ago made them eternally funny for me.

Was that really never posted here?
posted by amberglow at 9:15 PM on June 7, 2004

Stomping on same day, same week or even same month double posts I can understand. But the post in question doesn't seem to ever have been discussed on MeFi, and this poster was blasted simply because other MeFites were already familiar with the subject. (Others were not.)

If it was interesting enough to be picked up by the news outlets, why isn't it interesting enough to be discussed on MeFi? MeFi isn't (just) a news/funny shite aggregator, it's a forum for discussion.

I searched multiple times, and I could not find the subject in question mentioned on MeFi. If it is a double-post, and I failed to find it, (a) I aplogize for my shortcomings, and (b) the poster obviously didn't find it either, and perhaps deserves some slack. Can't we just say "sorry, we've talked about this already" instead of blasting the post?

We've recently had a small influx of new users -- don't we want them to feel welcome? Deriding them doesn't achieve this.

I'll shut up now.
posted by o2b at 9:23 PM on June 7, 2004

I'm sick of every other thread being a discussion of whether the post is too mainstream to be appropriate. People, please, please, if you are already familiar with the contents of a post, use the power of "hyper"-"text" to scroll SMOOTHLY past said post to greener pastures beyond, and allow those poor souls less memewise than yourself some space in which to innocently frolic and gallivant.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 9:27 PM on June 7, 2004

What? You haven't heard of buddhism until *NOW*? That's soooo 2500 years ago...

aside: Mefi is full of snarky wanky hipster ubergeek posers? When did this happen?
posted by elphTeq at 10:06 PM on June 7, 2004

o2b: MeFi Cabal. 'nuff said. ;-P
posted by mischief at 10:06 PM on June 7, 2004

I may be a snarky wanky hipster übergeek, but I am not a poseur!


(Well, OK, maybe just a little...)
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:13 PM on June 7, 2004

As long as I've read Metafilter, there has always been things to read and things to skip. I skip the ones I am not interested in and avoid posting the less than nice things I have to say, when the occasion comes up. It's made my much shorter time since membership more enjoyable.

If I found something truly off base, enough to take someone to task for it, I'd take it to MeTa instead of crapping all over someone's thread. For all I know, I may be the only one offended and need to vent, unrelated to the topic being discussed. Either way, there are plenty of people in MeTa to make any discussion about an FPP on MeFi worth not degrading the already low level of discussion on some threads. I liked this topic, but found the comments haven't done it justice so far. The forum comments on the linked site were a much better read.

Oh, I'm not suggesting y'all should be like me or that my way is better for you. This is just the formula that works for me. On the other hand, there is no coherent policy about this and certainly no consistent policing done by the community or the community owner. I'd be happy to not read whether or not something was double posted or if jilted user of the day was unhappy about it. It would be nice if the topic could be discussed, at length, seriously, but maybe that's just not possible. I'm all for enforcing community standards and generally improving the places I visit, but I wouldn't even begin to know what or where to pitch in. Making FPP is not something I am particularly skilled in. I didn't join to nominate the best of the web, but contribute to what I thought were some of the best discussions on the web.

Cheer up, Mo. And o2b, I don't get it either, but Mo just seemed grumpy more than anything else. I'm with most people on the thread - I'd not seen it, found it funny and would love a t-shirt, if it weren't white. :-)
posted by sequential at 10:29 PM on June 7, 2004

Mo is pretty much correct, albeit a little harsh. But that's why we have MeTa. (1)

Searches for "We are sorry that our President is an idiot" and "bag tag" on Google yielded no Metafilter results. Searching for "tom bihn" yielded this AskMe thread which does not mention it. Searching using search.mefi, has "some issues with the search results, which are being worked out now", but currently yields "Nothing was found with that search criteria, try searching again". It's certainly something people have already expressed appreciation for in the thread.

I'll agree, Mo was a little harsh, but why exactly is he right? That's an honest question. If there are no posts about it on Metafilter, why does it matter to the quality of the thread if Mo heard about it three months ago?
posted by sequential at 10:57 PM on June 7, 2004

I was just struck by how out of date it was -- it says "March 25, 2004" right at the top of the page. If I was posting someone's old blog entry from March, I'd expect to be mocked.

A good post to MetaFilter is something that meets the following criteria: most people haven't seen it before...

Most people had seen this before, regardless of whether or not it had been on MeFi. Sorry.
posted by reklaw at 11:03 PM on June 7, 2004

What makes you think most people have seen it before? I hadn't. Neither had most of the people who chimed in.
posted by subgenius at 11:05 PM on June 7, 2004

I don't understand the bile

the bile. it vibrates.
posted by quonsar at 11:21 PM on June 7, 2004

Most people had seen this before, regardless of whether or not it had been on MeFi. Sorry.

I hadn't seen it either. True, my sample size is just me, but so is yours, so lets neither of us make assumptions about what most people have seen without having a good way to back up our statements.
posted by malphigian at 11:32 PM on June 7, 2004

Except by your own standards, most people on the thread hadn't seen this before.

And your facts are a bit disingenuous. The post was made March 25, 2004, but the middle of the long page was dated April 15 and there were active posts to it today. BoingBoing picked up on it on April 5, 2004.

Posting links from BoingBoing has been previously discussed, at great length. The conversation started similarly:

I hate to break it to you, but if you don't read boingboing -- the most pointed-to weblog on the internet -- then you have no goddamn clue, and you embarrass yourself in a community where the! best! of! the! web! is coolth-currency. (1)

The next day, the same poster made this comment about the source of his earlier knowledge of the information:

Also : boingboing ROCKS. Consistently worth the time. If you do not read it, you should. It really deserves to be the most-linked weblog on the planet. (1)

My point is, though you may read BoingBoing, others don't. It doesn't matter that it's a well linked site. Instead of snarking early in a thread, maybe it would be better for Metafilter to not make threads into a pissing match. And certainly you don't believe our community measuring stick should involve what has made it into BoingBoing. And I don't disagree with the general rule, but as far as memes go, the FPP in question isn't like posting AYB or SWK.

Oh, and BoingBoing has never cracked the top 5,000 most trafficked sites and has ranged in the past two years between the top 100,000 and the top 10,000 or so. On the other hand, metafilter is consistently more widely seen, though they are closer in reach now than ever before.
posted by sequential at 11:38 PM on June 7, 2004

wrong boing boing.
posted by joedan at 12:45 AM on June 8, 2004

sequential: huh? You're the only one discussing boingboing here. I don't read it (ever), and I'd seen that link before. It was on way more blogs than just that boingboing -- it was all over the web.

subgenius and malphigian are right, though, of course -- it looks like most people hadn't seen it before. I'll just shrug my shoulders and wonder how they missed it, and keep schtum the next time someone posts a link that made the rounds months back, I guess.
posted by reklaw at 1:52 AM on June 8, 2004

I don't see an issue with posting 'old' or commonly read stuff - if anyone doesn't want to read / discuss it then they can feel free to skip it (as others have said).

However, double posts in a short time do annoy me - if there's going to be a discussion about why it's a bad thing for marsupials to be banned from adopting reptiles then I want to be able to follow the entire discussion in one place. It's hard to follow when you end up skipping back and fore between different posts and no-one really knows which thread to post into.

It'd be good if there was someway for threads to become joined together.
posted by daveg at 4:27 AM on June 8, 2004

Was it a pile on or one poster? Post a thread using my nic, then see what happens to you. Bring your case here may make a double post.
Looking back days from now, the threads comments will have a perspective place; rewarding, more info, follow up, silly, & WTF. The thread's comments bring a life to it, like this post. Let the thread's democracy voice itself, I need the laugh.
posted by thomcatspike at 5:36 AM on June 8, 2004

o2b, errrrrrrrr...please excuse me, thought you posted the thread...looking at the time line, your meta-talk thread may have helped turned the comments too.
posted by thomcatspike at 5:50 AM on June 8, 2004

While I had seen it previously, the text of the FPP was insufficient to stir the memory.
posted by mischief at 6:20 AM on June 8, 2004

Some have said that deriding users this way will create a hostile environment in which people are reluctant to engage. Mission accomplished. I have been reading mefi and meta for quite a while. I seldom post because I have been intimidated by the crap I have seen posters get if they use bad mefi etiquette or make a double post.

I would guess that a quarter of the FPPs I read I have seen elsewhere or contain info that is not news to me. In these cases I don't chastise the poster, I just move on to the next post. I don't have time for that kind petty crap.
posted by alball at 6:23 AM on June 8, 2004

seen it, even posted it myself, but I have a scroll button and can choose not to re-read it, or add links to it in case I know of any with more info n the subject, right? Pissing in the thread is just a tad overboard, seen it? Then ignore the thread and move on to this weeks meme instead.
posted by dabitch at 6:51 AM on June 8, 2004

Shit alball, if all that's preventing you from posting is the crap you might get then you're too sensitive. Keep in mind that it's just a website. Intimidation only works if you let it.

FWIW, I figure that about 15% of my FPP's have been double posts. C'est la vie. I get my hands slapped and I move on.

As to the bag tag, post, I believe the issue is not that it's a double post, which it isn't, but that others have seen it in other places. If they feel they need to be condescending and superior, by all means, go right ahead, but they lose points in my own points system and become less believable. No big deal.
posted by ashbury at 6:59 AM on June 8, 2004

"And hey, just so you know, it's not that common, it doesn't happen to every guy and it is a big deal!."

/Rachel
posted by dash_slot- at 7:46 AM on June 8, 2004

I had seen it before, and I still thought it was a good post. Why the fuck should we worry about whether a link has been on some other site? I object to double posts, but this is completely different (and o2b, you were muddying the waters by joining the concepts). Obviously most people here hadn't seen it; why should they be deprived because they're not cool enough to hang out on some site that some ubergeek thinks anybody who is anybody should read?

And personally, if I had been nasty to some poster on the basis of an idea that was subsequently disproved ("everybody's already seen this!"), I'd apologize. But that's just me.

Hang in there, alball. We've all taken our lickin' at one time or another, and we keep on tickin'.
posted by languagehat at 8:00 AM on June 8, 2004

ashbury, I don't really give a fuck if someone has a problem with a post I have made. My point is that a mefi thread discussion should not be a series of hostile and snarky comments. It turns people off and discourages them from participating.

I am sure that there are a ton of lurkers on mefi who would partcipate more if it wasn't for all the crap that gets thrown around. It is just a waste of time.
posted by alball at 8:02 AM on June 8, 2004

I've found that if a thread is turning into a bitch session as this one did, one good thoughtful comment can really turn things around.
posted by orange swan at 8:25 AM on June 8, 2004

wrong boing boing.

Thanks, joedan. I was looking at the same graph as the one you linked to, but managed to swipe the URL from my browser history. That illustrates my point rather well though. The first URL I checked was http://boingboing.com. I didn't even know what the correct URL was without a google query.

sequential: huh? You're the only one discussing boingboing here. I don't read it (ever), and I'd seen that link before. It was on way more blogs than just that boingboing -- it was all over the web.

reklaw, it's not that complicated, but I could have written more clearly. Here is my train of thought:

1) This was posted on BoingBoing two months ago.

2) MeFi and MeTa have both had threads with discussions about posting links from BoingBoing.

3) My best summary of those threads is "Try not to post from BoingBoing, but it's not strictly prohibited."

I never inferred you read BoingBoing or that this was swipped from BoingBoing. Apparently you didn't recognize that I was doing my best to support your argument that this was "all over the web". In the end, I concluded it was not so hugely popular that your comments were justified. Not calling you out, not saying you don't have the right to your opinion, I'm simply disagreeing and spelling out exactly why I disagree.

From my personal experience, I forget sometimes that most people don't read the same websites I do, but I've learned that it's better to share the story than it is to deride their choice of leisure time activities.

I am sure that there are a ton of lurkers on mefi who would partcipate more if it wasn't for all the crap that gets thrown around. It is just a waste of time.

alball, I agree with that sentiment 100% and, in fact, don't post in some threads I'd like to when they get crapped on. Nothing like having a thread your involved with deleted.
posted by sequential at 8:43 AM on June 8, 2004

Actually, sequential, as I mentioned above, making a positive contribution to a turbulent thread can be the making of it. I'd urge everyone to go ahead and post whenever they've got something good to say, regardless of whatever anyone else is doing or whether the thread may be deleted anyway.
posted by orange swan at 8:56 AM on June 8, 2004

Yeah!
posted by chicobangs at 9:31 AM on June 8, 2004

I've seen stuff on other well known sites and found myself hoping that it would be posted on MetaFilter, because I'd be interested to see what MetaFilter folks would make of it. I've held back from posting it myself, due to this sort of mainstream-avoidance-vitriol-induction. If I think this sort of thinking is a shame, am I evil?
posted by normy at 9:48 AM on June 8, 2004

why should they be deprived because they're not cool enough to hang out on some site that some ubergeek thinks anybody who is anybody should read?

Dude, it was on CNN and AP and Reuters and I know I saw it in the Times or the Washpost, not to mention every lefty blog around.

That said, there is too much policing going on and I'm sorry I joined in crapping in the thread, when I am much more of a move on sort of gal.
posted by CunningLinguist at 10:54 AM on June 8, 2004

We've all taken our lickin' at one time or another.

Um...I haven't. What does one have to do in order to receive this lickin'?
posted by iconomy at 11:28 AM on June 8, 2004

A declaration of intent is usually enough to get the lickin' ball a-rollin'.

(Hold still.) Who's first?
posted by chicobangs at 11:33 AM on June 8, 2004

Has anyone posted the news that Reagan is dead yet? 'Cause I was thinking about posting it since I figured no one else had seen it since I hadn't. Oh, and I came across this hilarious "cat scan" site that I'm working on a FPP for. It'll be great!
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 11:50 AM on June 8, 2004

one persons "all over the web" is another's "wow! what a find!" one assumes everyone has seen what he/she has seen. meanwhile, there are millions of new people coming online. they fan out, start powersurfing and stumbling over great links just like you did. the best and worst of them are the same links. the population of the internet is in a state of constant churn. deal widdit. can you imagine if someone like rcade (who had already been link blogging forever when i was first shown the web) pitched a shrill bitch everytime he saw a link he's already seen? cheez.
posted by quonsar at 11:54 AM on June 8, 2004

So there's a lesson to take away here that is worth mentioning. Today, someone also posted a link to something two months old that anyone that reads lots of blogs has seen (southpark aristocrats). But they bulked the post up with some incredible background information and upcoming news related to it. It was an exemplary MetaFilter post, but it was about a topic that made the rounds months ago. What made it work was the addition of helpful information.

Now, since the bag thing happened three months ago, it's ok to make a post about it here, but do some legwork. Didn't the company catch heat for it? Did the company sell more bags? Did freepers try and get their business license pulled? It's a funny little thing they added onto the bags that got way out of hand and I'm sure there's some followup news worth sharing.

I would have loved to hear from the company three months after the discovery was made, to hear if it was good/bad/ugly for them.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 12:19 PM on June 8, 2004

Um...I haven't. What does one have to do in order to receive this lickin'?

Post a real nude picture.


PS. Normy is Evil.
posted by y2karl at 2:46 PM on June 8, 2004

OK, I'll start.

*licks iconomy*
posted by languagehat at 4:25 PM on June 8, 2004

I've always found the argument that stuff is everywhere else so it shouldn't be here to be ... odd. I read MeFi so I don't have to read everywhere else, because frankly, if I had to read most of the community sites out there just to find the cool stuff, I'd have to give up my job. Then I'd have to kill myself, because reading most of those sites is a horrid experience.

It makes sense to me that the best of the web tends to end up all over the place, it's the best, after all, and people are interested. It also makes sense for it to end up here, because picking up the best of the web is what we're supposed to be doing. If we're really after "the best of the web that hasn't been posted on BoingBoing" then maybe we ought to include 'Search BoingBoing' on the posting page somewhere.
posted by jacquilynne at 4:25 PM on June 8, 2004

*licks iconomy*
posted by Shane at 9:30 AM on June 9, 2004