keywords to avoid double posts July 9, 2004 7:45 AM Subscribe
Double Post Suggestion: Part of the reason people double-post is because when they do a search, nothing turns up. This often has to do with the fact that the first poster wanted to maintain an element of surprise and therefore did not put any information into the post except a link. I would suggest that from now on, for each new front page post, that there be an additional, hidden field called 'description' or 'keywords' or both where the poster could put a list of keywords or a description that might turn up in future searches. This field would not show up on the front page, so posters could maintain the element of surprise without making it difficult to find the post in future.
I'm against encouraging surprise posts. If your post requires surprise to be interesting, it's not.
posted by jacquilynne at 8:07 AM on July 9, 2004
posted by jacquilynne at 8:07 AM on July 9, 2004
We've already agreed that the poster has to publish a strictly structured preamble detailing the post's contents before posting.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 8:46 AM on July 9, 2004
posted by DrJohnEvans at 8:46 AM on July 9, 2004
Jah! Ve must adhere to ze schtriktest method for posting. Ve can haf no deviation! Deviation est verboten!
posted by crunchland at 8:48 AM on July 9, 2004
posted by crunchland at 8:48 AM on July 9, 2004
I agree. Quite a lot of effort is required to include a decent description of one's post, so that other readers can quickly judge whether they're interested or not.
Lazy, arrogant, "Who cares?" posters (like crunchland), who want you to click no matter what, if just to find out what the link is, hold us all in contempt.
Surprises should be in the link, not around it. Otherwise, it's like cheap burlesque. The most surprising thing is something that's actually interesting and unknown.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 8:55 AM on July 9, 2004
Lazy, arrogant, "Who cares?" posters (like crunchland), who want you to click no matter what, if just to find out what the link is, hold us all in contempt.
Surprises should be in the link, not around it. Otherwise, it's like cheap burlesque. The most surprising thing is something that's actually interesting and unknown.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 8:55 AM on July 9, 2004
I find the easiest way to judge the quality of "surprise" posts are by looking at the words right after "posted by."
And I don't hold all of you in contempt. Just you, Cardosa.
posted by crunchland at 9:03 AM on July 9, 2004
And I don't hold all of you in contempt. Just you, Cardosa.
posted by crunchland at 9:03 AM on July 9, 2004
I don't think the keywords idea is gonna work. One of two things will happen: the poster's keywords will be too vague, and match too many unrelated entries; or the poster's keywords will be too specific, and be of a different flavour than keywords of a double post. We've seen how two different posters usually approach a post from different angles; this would extend to the keywords.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 9:05 AM on July 9, 2004
posted by DrJohnEvans at 9:05 AM on July 9, 2004
Lazy, arrogant, "Who cares?" posters (like crunchland), who want you to click no matter what, if just to find out what the link is, hold us all in contempt.
It's funny because it's true. And it's not that often that I agree with Miguel.
The problem here is that most people who engage in this type of cryptic posting think that they're clever. We have a similar problem with "one-liner" posters. Unfortunately, because of the medium, it's difficult for posters to realize whether or not they are clever, or funny. In real life, if your joke sucks, no one laughs and you're the wiser. Here, there's no anticipation for laughter, so stupid one-liners receive the same attention and extremely witty comments.
The same applies for cryptic, "surprise" posts.
posted by BlueTrain at 9:05 AM on July 9, 2004
It's funny because it's true. And it's not that often that I agree with Miguel.
The problem here is that most people who engage in this type of cryptic posting think that they're clever. We have a similar problem with "one-liner" posters. Unfortunately, because of the medium, it's difficult for posters to realize whether or not they are clever, or funny. In real life, if your joke sucks, no one laughs and you're the wiser. Here, there's no anticipation for laughter, so stupid one-liners receive the same attention and extremely witty comments.
The same applies for cryptic, "surprise" posts.
posted by BlueTrain at 9:05 AM on July 9, 2004
Well, personally I find the 'surprise' and one-line links annoying myself. Then again, I find the constant barrage of double-posts and those who jump on them even more annoying. I was trying to think of a way that we could at least eliminate part of the problem. We may not be able to stop people from one-line posting, but perhaps we can at least try and prevent double-posts.
I do think the argument that people approach posts in different ways is very legitimate. A good example was the trunkmonkey post, where the double poster searched for 'trunk' and 'monkey', but not 'trunkmonkey'.
Still, if we can eliminate 50% of double-posts, is that a good thing? Do the costs outweigh the benefits?
The other good question of keywords or descriptions is certainly the too many results problem, as DrJohnEvans brings up.
Oh well, it was certainly worth a try!
posted by PigAlien at 9:19 AM on July 9, 2004
I do think the argument that people approach posts in different ways is very legitimate. A good example was the trunkmonkey post, where the double poster searched for 'trunk' and 'monkey', but not 'trunkmonkey'.
Still, if we can eliminate 50% of double-posts, is that a good thing? Do the costs outweigh the benefits?
The other good question of keywords or descriptions is certainly the too many results problem, as DrJohnEvans brings up.
Oh well, it was certainly worth a try!
posted by PigAlien at 9:19 AM on July 9, 2004
Actually, I feel the need to be more specific.
I don't really mind double-posts. It is particularly embarassing when someone double-posts when the original post is still on the front page! However, since I cannot read every single post that comes along, there are many posts I miss days, weeks and months previously which I catch the second time around.
I think when someone double-posts that it is poor etiquette to scream 'DOUBLE POST!'. Instead, I think it would be more appropriate to simply say:
[link] Please note the previous thread for more comments on this subject... [/link]
posted by PigAlien at 9:23 AM on July 9, 2004
I don't really mind double-posts. It is particularly embarassing when someone double-posts when the original post is still on the front page! However, since I cannot read every single post that comes along, there are many posts I miss days, weeks and months previously which I catch the second time around.
I think when someone double-posts that it is poor etiquette to scream 'DOUBLE POST!'. Instead, I think it would be more appropriate to simply say:
[link] Please note the previous thread for more comments on this subject... [/link]
posted by PigAlien at 9:23 AM on July 9, 2004
If this feature request is granted, you know, it will immediately be followed by a feature request for an option to allow the keywords to show up for those of us who don't feel like guessing whether they're interested in a link...
posted by Karmakaze at 9:29 AM on July 9, 2004
posted by Karmakaze at 9:29 AM on July 9, 2004
Please note the previous thread for more comments on this subject...
And here's a clue for those of you who don't like my posting style : You can't stop me, so I do hope you can learn to somehow cope with your discomfort.
posted by crunchland at 9:29 AM on July 9, 2004
And here's a clue for those of you who don't like my posting style : You can't stop me, so I do hope you can learn to somehow cope with your discomfort.
posted by crunchland at 9:29 AM on July 9, 2004
The problem here is that most people who engage in this type of cryptic posting think that they're clever. We have a similar problem with "one-liner" posters. Unfortunately, because of the medium, it's difficult for posters to realize whether or not they are clever, or funny. In real life, if your joke sucks, no one laughs and you're the wiser. Here, there's no anticipation for laughter, so stupid one-liners receive the same attention and extremely witty comments.
CHOO CHOO!
posted by The God Complex at 9:32 AM on July 9, 2004
CHOO CHOO!
posted by The God Complex at 9:32 AM on July 9, 2004
Otherwise, it's like cheap burlesque.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
(Though I, too, dislike the lazy posts.)
You can't stop me, so I do hope you can learn to somehow cope with your discomfort.
Yeah, that about sums up your sense of "community," I'd say. Welcome to being part of the problem.
posted by rushmc at 9:39 AM on July 9, 2004
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
(Though I, too, dislike the lazy posts.)
You can't stop me, so I do hope you can learn to somehow cope with your discomfort.
Yeah, that about sums up your sense of "community," I'd say. Welcome to being part of the problem.
posted by rushmc at 9:39 AM on July 9, 2004
A hidden field would be nice. Poster could also enclose keywords in HTML comments in the description.
posted by chunking express at 9:39 AM on July 9, 2004
posted by chunking express at 9:39 AM on July 9, 2004
There's nothing wrong with crunch's style, at all.
I just doubleposted something (the Living Room Candidate thing) that might have been caught by keywords, since the url was different (and of course, i was lazy in not searching "Living Room" or anything).
posted by amberglow at 9:40 AM on July 9, 2004
I just doubleposted something (the Living Room Candidate thing) that might have been caught by keywords, since the url was different (and of course, i was lazy in not searching "Living Room" or anything).
posted by amberglow at 9:40 AM on July 9, 2004
Also, it's not as if double posts are out kidnapping your pets or anything. I mean, this very thread is a double post, and we'll all perfectly fine. So far.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 9:54 AM on July 9, 2004
posted by DrJohnEvans at 9:54 AM on July 9, 2004
Or maybe we're not perfectly fine. I just made my first MeFi typo. Two years of perfection, gone!
posted by DrJohnEvans at 9:56 AM on July 9, 2004
posted by DrJohnEvans at 9:56 AM on July 9, 2004
Use (brief) title tags in your links, and they will show up in a search. See my example here.
posted by PrinceValium at 10:08 AM on July 9, 2004
posted by PrinceValium at 10:08 AM on July 9, 2004
It's true, I confess! I did not search to see if this was a double post itself! Oh, the irony :) Well, it isn't actually a double-post, per se, although the topic has been discussed before and this exact same method suggested in previous comments.
Boldly go where no man has gone before? Maybe next time!
posted by PigAlien at 10:53 AM on July 9, 2004
Boldly go where no man has gone before? Maybe next time!
posted by PigAlien at 10:53 AM on July 9, 2004
The important thing is, at least we all got to see Migs and Crunchy circling each other, eyes full of menace and switchblades at the ready, as the opening strains of "When You're a Jet" rumble into the foreground.
Some traditions just never get old.
posted by arto at 11:06 AM on July 9, 2004
Some traditions just never get old.
posted by arto at 11:06 AM on July 9, 2004
Yeah, but knife fights around here are less dangerous than in Michael Jackson videos.
posted by yerfatma at 11:51 AM on July 9, 2004
posted by yerfatma at 11:51 AM on July 9, 2004
Having the keywords in a "hidden to uses but not to search engines is probably a good idea. Except that it will only be as useful as the posters make it, with the most likely scenario being that it will not be useful at all, because everyone will associate different keywords with the post, so searching for your own personal keywords will not help at all.
"Surprise" posts are great, adding a touch of the unknown in an otherwise drab world. If you are too scared to click on a link without knowing exactly what you are getting yourself in for, maybe you need to loosen up a little. If the reason is because you are at work, which I suspect is a large part of the objection to this style of link, scroll past the thread until you are at home or other suitable venue for being surprised.
We don't need a style guide for how links must be presented, we are quite capable of choosing whether or not to follow a link on our own.
Plus, we had to post our FPPs uphill....both ways...
You were LUCKY!
posted by dg at 4:49 PM on July 9, 2004
"Surprise" posts are great, adding a touch of the unknown in an otherwise drab world. If you are too scared to click on a link without knowing exactly what you are getting yourself in for, maybe you need to loosen up a little. If the reason is because you are at work, which I suspect is a large part of the objection to this style of link, scroll past the thread until you are at home or other suitable venue for being surprised.
We don't need a style guide for how links must be presented, we are quite capable of choosing whether or not to follow a link on our own.
Plus, we had to post our FPPs uphill....both ways...
You were LUCKY!
posted by dg at 4:49 PM on July 9, 2004
Keywords? Huh? Aren't humans exceedingly bad at metadata? They are, in my experience.
posted by majick at 11:02 PM on July 9, 2004
posted by majick at 11:02 PM on July 9, 2004
when you're a jet, you're a jet all the way, from your first cigarette to your last dying day.
posted by crunchland at 6:17 AM on July 10, 2004
posted by crunchland at 6:17 AM on July 10, 2004
« Older "How long will there will cowards logged into... | This is a small thing about which I am a bit... Newer »
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by jpoulos at 7:57 AM on July 9, 2004