Join 3,424 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)

Tags:

Single-link op-ed front page post? GYOWFW!
July 20, 2004 3:08 PM   Subscribe

Single-link op-ed front page post? GYOWFW!
posted by hama7 to Etiquette/Policy at 3:08 PM (123 comments total)

Persian Art Music
posted by liam at 3:16 PM on July 20, 2004


Buh? Are you calling yourself out or did the posters in your thread somehow fall into a "clever trap"?
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 3:17 PM on July 20, 2004


Is this thread, like, supposed to be the last five minutes of Fat Albert when they explain to us the valuable lesson of the episode or something?

I don't get it.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 3:22 PM on July 20, 2004


Get Your Own Witty French Woman?
posted by liam at 3:23 PM on July 20, 2004


dunbar chiappin
posted by quonsar at 3:23 PM on July 20, 2004


it is a single-link op-ed column by a well-known rightwing columnist--Lowry's on the Ann Coulter level, i'd say.

(and Seth's sad attempt at attacking me in the thread failed again--poor baby. Someone teach him what an op-ed column is.)
posted by amberglow at 3:23 PM on July 20, 2004


Gays You Obviously Would Fuck Wholeheartedly?
posted by liam at 3:26 PM on July 20, 2004


Tolerance of hama7 summarily revoked.
posted by Jimbob at 3:28 PM on July 20, 2004


holy shit! it's all so clear now!
posted by mcsweetie at 3:35 PM on July 20, 2004


ah, first Seth, and now biffa too! how fun!
posted by amberglow at 3:41 PM on July 20, 2004


amberglow,
Let's get this straight.
Your single source threads in order to grind your axe are ok because you say the authors are acceptable. But hama7's singe source thread in order to grind his axe is not ok, because you have deemed the author persona non grata. Is that right?

Look, hama7's link is shit for the exact reason that people are criticizing it. But, then again, so are the majority of yours. So either you are a careless hypocrit, or your partisan shilling has so blinded you to objectivity that you cannot see the obvious. Plenty of people can and should criticize the FPP, but for you to do it is pathetic.
posted by Seth at 3:48 PM on July 20, 2004


Get Your Oriental Wacky Fetish Weturned?
/bugs bunny
posted by Ufez Jones at 3:48 PM on July 20, 2004


Everytime you bitch at each other in a political thread, baby jesus votes for Nader.
posted by PrinceValium at 3:53 PM on July 20, 2004


I like hama7. I dislike seth. The jury's out on XQUZYPHYR.
posted by angry modem at 3:56 PM on July 20, 2004


angrymodem, i'd comment if i wasn't so miserable and broken spirited.
posted by quonsar at 3:57 PM on July 20, 2004


Seth, as I posted in the main thread, virtually all of Amberglow's posts were from news sources such as AP, or other news sources. Few if any were opinion columns. Yes, the reaction can be the same, but for someone so concerned with accuracy you seem to be missing the difference between op/ed and news posts. The main difference, in my opinion, is that an op/ed link means the disccusion is about the author in question and his ideas, where a news post about a particular issue means the discussion should, in theory, be about the event, and not the author of the story or any particular slant he or her may have.
posted by chaz at 4:00 PM on July 20, 2004


I love you people, I really do, but the fucking soap-opera needs to stop.
There, I said something
posted by elwoodwiles at 4:01 PM on July 20, 2004


Gays You Obviously Would Fuck Wholeheartedly?

Did thombody thay my name?
posted by WolfDaddy at 4:01 PM on July 20, 2004


The soap-opera is what keeps me coming back here. seriously.
posted by greasepig at 4:05 PM on July 20, 2004


Chaz, I am not confused. Every one of the posts I listed from amberglow is shit. Hama7's post is shit. amberglow is therefore being highly hypocritcal for criticizing hama7's post.

But why are the posts shit? Because they are technically op/eds? No. Why the posts are shit is because they present a loaded, biased agenda with no balance and no attempt to present a valid issue to discuss. Since the posts begin as such slanted claptrap, no good discussion can emanate. All that can happen is just either partisan ass-patting or "You are wrong/evil/stupid, we are right/enlightened."

Furthermore, all of the posts violate the basic premise of what a post should be: something new and interesting, that isn't found at major resources.

So they are shit. Defend amber if you feel like, but if you are trying to justify his garbage in order to seperate it from hama7's garbage, you are litterally splitting hairs on the back of a fly munching on feces.
posted by Seth at 4:07 PM on July 20, 2004


Your single source threads in order to grind your axe are ok because you say the authors are acceptable. But hama7's singe source thread in order to grind his axe is not ok, because you have deemed the author persona non grata. Is that right?
Look, hama7's link is shit for the exact reason that people are criticizing it. But, then again, so are the majority of yours. So either you are a careless hypocrit, or your partisan shilling has so blinded you to objectivity that you cannot see the obvious. Plenty of people can and should criticize the FPP, but for you to do it is pathetic.


I don't grind axes...I post interesting things i find on the web. Interesting ideas too, like that Allen Plan post you liked so much--I liked it too. I didn't just go to my favorite liberal or leftwing magazine and post the editor's latest column like hama just did.

If you agree that plenty of people can and should criticize the FPP, then why attack me? I didn't start this post--hama did. I didn't make that FPP--hama did. Furthermore, hama calling himself out here shows that he knew it was unacceptable, and is thus a troll, much like you. If you want a date, you only have to ask, darling. Whatever your obsession is with me, don't post it in the blue unless it belongs there. I doubt a list of my links belonged in that FPP, no matter what the form and topic of it was.

hama's post belongs in a category called op-edfilter, i believe. You can look up past comments by Matt and many others on op-eds as a post by themselves.

And on preview: if you're so into shit, and concerned with it, our date's off.
posted by amberglow at 4:10 PM on July 20, 2004



Chaz, I am not confused. Every one of the posts I listed from amberglow is shit. Hama7's post is shit. amberglow is therefore being highly hypocritcal for criticizing hama7's post.


Amberglow was criticizing haha7 for posting an op ed. The posts you linked to by amberglow were news stories, not op eds. While both aren't considered good posts, it's generally accepted that one is worse than the other. Your opinion doesn't make what Amberglow says hypocritical.
posted by Space Coyote at 4:11 PM on July 20, 2004


I love you people, I really do, but the fucking soap-opera needs to stop.


I second that.
posted by Quartermass at 4:15 PM on July 20, 2004


I'd just like to pop in and complain in a droning way about the lefty groupthink that forces our poor, marginalized administration turd-fellators to such lengths. Those brave darlings, clinging with fingernails to the the sheer precipice of the Metafilter Liberal HomoCommie Massmind, shrieking into the wind.

Won't someone please think of the children rights of the righties?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:16 PM on July 20, 2004


Seth: Everything you have ever posted on this site has been Grade 'A' industrial-strength, 5-star, VSOP shit. You are the last person in the entire history of the universe to be making accusations of shitness. In fact shit is a shining beacon in the arid wasteland of your tedious posting history and is something to which you can only ever aspire to in your wildest drug-fuelled fantasies.

With knobs on.
posted by i_cola at 4:22 PM on July 20, 2004


Thanks for teaching us all a valuable lesson, hama7; you are a king amongst peasants.

This thread has left me indescribably sad, but I will now go on to explain, in great detail, how sad it has made me, completely invalidating the adjective "indescribably."

*forlorn sigh*
posted by The God Complex at 4:22 PM on July 20, 2004


It's like in the cartoons, when the little tornado of battling limbs, teeth, hair and flying stars comes whirling in from the next room to this one.
posted by gottabefunky at 4:25 PM on July 20, 2004


Also, would somebody teach Seth that attacking someone's argument (in this case that hama7's thread was "bad") by pointing out a perceived inconsistency in the person doing so (in this case amberglow) is irrelevant and qualifies as a logical fallacy? Thanks.

In addition, it would be nice if at some point people were banned (a week for the first time, a month for the second, etc.) when they refuse to keep their personal grudges out of the blue? A certain amount of FPP criticism in the blue is probably acceptable, and any post worth it's salt can stand the occasional negative comment, but this constant attempt to derail threads is getting more than a little annoying and does the site a far worse disservice than posting these fpp's that break all these supposed "rules" everyone is going on about.
posted by The God Complex at 4:27 PM on July 20, 2004



Won't someone please think of the children rights of the righties?


They did think about the children and the evidence is on videotape, sir.
posted by The God Complex at 4:28 PM on July 20, 2004


I think the reason why the troll is linking to his own post is to prevent someone else from doing it, and thus try and prevent a legitimate complaint about a post he knew sucked from the start.

In short, hama7 == got nothin'.
posted by Space Coyote at 4:33 PM on July 20, 2004


Space Coyote - thanks for making a grand point. amber's posts are less shitty than hama7's posts. Well, since we are all about lowering the bar here, I guess that serves as ringing endorsement of amberglow's behavior.

amberglow - Considering your recent whining about anti-gay bias, you sure do throw out the cutesy fag-happy stuff when you feel like it. And please knock off the rhetorical flirting. I wouldn't touch you with a stolen dick.

TGC - so being inconsistent is not a logical fallacy? But, discrediting hama7's argument by claiming that the source is, ipse dixit, wrong is a good logical attack on the argument? (Would it be too weird if I pointed out your inconsistency?)
posted by Seth at 4:36 PM on July 20, 2004


can we get back to what the hell GYOWFW is supposed to mean, please?
posted by evening at 4:36 PM on July 20, 2004


I love you people, I really do, but the fucking soap-opera needs to stop.
I second that.

*Votes in favour of the motion*
posted by dg at 4:40 PM on July 20, 2004


what the hell GYOWFW is supposed to mean, please?

I think it's Swedish for "cock bucket."
posted by Cyrano at 4:44 PM on July 20, 2004


I love you people, I really do, but the fucking soap-opera needs to stop.

But I have to tune in tommorrow to find out if stavros will come out his coma so he can help hama7 get over Witty and find true love....

[organ music]
posted by jonmc at 4:45 PM on July 20, 2004


what the hell GYOWFW is supposed to mean,
then can the thread be deleted. Because at this point not knowing GetYourOwnW(?)F-kingW(?) means this post looks like the several below it.

hama7, most of the comments in the thread were usual yet it did generate a lot of comments. Did you feel the thread's comments were hijacked, a personal attack on you or some other non-personal reason?
posted by thomcatspike at 4:46 PM on July 20, 2004


GYOWFW
posted by esch at 4:47 PM on July 20, 2004


amberglow - Considering your recent whining about anti-gay bias, you sure do throw out the cutesy fag-happy stuff when you feel like it. And please knock off the rhetorical flirting. I wouldn't touch you with a stolen dick.

I am a cutesy fag--and happy too. I throw it out to you because i know it bothers you, troll. Now go play with hama--he obviously needs the attention, having posted in the blue and now here about his post in the blue.
posted by amberglow at 4:47 PM on July 20, 2004


[organ music]

WE HAVE A WINNER.
posted by quonsar at 4:48 PM on July 20, 2004


I love you people, I really do, but the fucking soap-opera needs to stop.
I second that.
*Votes in favour of the motion*


Aye! Aye, I said!
posted by gleuschk at 4:48 PM on July 20, 2004


I throw it out to you because i know it bothers you, troll.

This bothers him?

I'm neither a fag nor cutesy but I'll attempt to mince if it helps.
posted by jonmc at 4:57 PM on July 20, 2004


Please. Can Matt come back and tell the bad people off and delete all the horrible posts and make everything nice again and we'll all look at each other and we'll laugh because we realised we were overreacting and we'll go outside and play and promise to never ever be so silly again. Please... Matt...
posted by seanyboy at 4:57 PM on July 20, 2004


*wakes up, looks around.*

Whe...where am I? Am I back in Kansas?

Wait...you were in my dream! And you! And you too! All of you were there!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:59 PM on July 20, 2004


Wait...you were in my dream! And you! And you too! All of you were there!

BUt we were all wearing purple bikini underwear and doing the polka. I told you not to mix mescal and easy cheese before bed, stav.
posted by jonmc at 5:03 PM on July 20, 2004


I like hama7. I dislike seth. The jury's out on XQUZYPHYR.

We shall see how he fares in THUNDERDOME!
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 5:07 PM on July 20, 2004


P.S. i_cola: please have like a thousand of my babies.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 5:08 PM on July 20, 2004


Shyeah,XQ.

Like we need another hero.
posted by chicobangs at 5:11 PM on July 20, 2004


I agree with seth.

*dies*

But really, lots of threads are shit on metafilter. Only we can make it better. So the next time you see an op-ed like this, for god's sake (hell, for everybod's sake), stop and take a deep breath. Take another. Then do one of two things. Either

a) do a heck of a lot of research and find a liberal commentator making each and every one of these claims, and link to your article only as a jumping off point or

b) leave that shit on your own blog, which hama7 you've well on suggested at the top of this thread.

Which is it going to be? I don't give a shit about left or right-wing posts. I could read right-wing or left-wing craziness all day. Lots of us could. But only if it's good -- if it's part of some real dialog, some real discussion, if it's framed in such a way as to bring out the best in us, forcing us to (gasp!) graple with the issues and find links to support our positions. That's when metafilter works.

[Note: Option "A" above is not exclusively answered in the manner I describe above. One could solve the problem of turning a crazy polemic into a good thread in myriad ways. It's not about your opinion, it's about making your opinion powerful in a way that uses the web. I've long ago given up on NewsFilter. Heck, I even admit to liking what people discuss in various political threads. But make 'em good people. That's all.]
posted by zpousman at 5:11 PM on July 20, 2004


I like hama7. I dislike seth. The jury's out on XQUZYPHYR.

We'll alert the media.
posted by jonmc at 5:12 PM on July 20, 2004


Well Seth I do agree with you in the abstract... problem is you have no credibility, you only emerged to point out the shittiness of Amberglow's criticism, not of the actual post in question. And your criticism wasn't well-formed or particularly insightful, all you did was show that you care more about stamping out people you don't agree with then with bad posts. Otherwise you would have been all over Hama7's post and not Amberglow's reaction.

But I do agree with you that single-issue (whether they be op/ed or news) posts with a clear POV usually don't make good posts.
posted by chaz at 5:16 PM on July 20, 2004


Get Your Own Witty French Woman?

Best. Advice. Ever.
posted by rushmc at 5:20 PM on July 20, 2004


How many people stir up all this shit? 10? 15? I see an easy way to solve the problem.
posted by smackfu at 5:21 PM on July 20, 2004


How many people stir up all this shit? 10? 15?

Yeah, but everybody's got their own list of 15 that they'd like liquidated and we're all on somebody's list.

Besides, admit it, it's the people you hate most who keep you coming back, at least partly.
posted by jonmc at 5:23 PM on July 20, 2004


It's Get Your Own Web Filter, Wanker, isn't it?
posted by nath at 5:28 PM on July 20, 2004


Give Yourself Over to Wolfdaddy, Filthy Whore?
posted by Space Coyote at 5:32 PM on July 20, 2004


What makes hama7 so upsetting is his passive-aggressive decision to be a fabulous contributor to MetaFilter and then deliberatly be a troll.

hama7 is like a waiter who escorts us to a table in a luxurious restaurant, uncorks the finest champagne in the house, brings us the most delicious steak we've ever eaten, and then he poops on you.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 5:36 PM on July 20, 2004


GYOWFW =

Giant Youthful Ovaries Would Fertilize Wonderfully

Generate Young Owls Within Federal Wetlands

Gah, You're Ovulating. Well, Fucking Withheld!
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 6:28 PM on July 20, 2004


So I just got from a wonderful and relaxing walk in the sunshine. I made my way up to the boutiques and cafes that line sleepy Hawthorne Blvd, bought some CDs, drank coffee and watched pretty girls in sundresses walk by. After finnishing my coffee and watching the white clouds slowly drifting through a blue sky, I walked over to the grocery. I bought corn, cabbage (I make a mean coleslaw) a bottle of Sancerre (Andre Neveu is the shizzle this year) and a thick cut of pork loin that I plan on cooking for dinner. I came home, pet the cat and put on my new CD and just thought I'd see how things were going.

I see they are still going..........
posted by elwoodwiles at 6:28 PM on July 20, 2004


so being inconsistent is not a logical fallacy? But, discrediting hama7's argument by claiming that the source is, ipse dixit, wrong is a good logical attack on the argument? (Would it be too weird if I pointed out your inconsistency?)

If someone makes an argument, past history that indicates they've acted otherwise is irrelevant to the debate at hand, and any attempt to bring it up would be considered a fallacy.

The problem with hama7's link is A) that it's an op-ed, not a news piece, and B) even if you don't mind op-eds, it's a stupid, factually-void one with little or no merit. Personally, I could care less if it's deleted--it's stupid and everyone already pointed it out in the thread. That's enough for me.
posted by The God Complex at 6:30 PM on July 20, 2004


GET YOUR OWN WARBLOG, FREEPING WEIRDO
posted by eddydamascene at 6:38 PM on July 20, 2004


Are we allowed to post FPPs to op-eds that are easily available to those who are looking for such things? Because, if we are, what is the point of MetaFilter, then?

I really, really like about half of Cathy Young's columns for Reason, but I don't post them as FPPs, because it seems to me that anyone who wanted to read them could go to Reason.

Now, as for GYOWFW, I thought it might stand for:

Grow Your Own Wrestling Federation, Women

Give Your Other Wife Fried Winkles

Gild Your Old, Wizened, Foreign Wiener

Go Yap On Wotten FM Wadio (cf. Elmer Fudd)
posted by Sidhedevil at 6:52 PM on July 20, 2004


Gash Your Own Weasel's Flesh, Wendell.
posted by wendell at 7:10 PM on July 20, 2004


Golly, You're Old! What Freaky Windows!
posted by wendell at 7:12 PM on July 20, 2004


Give Your Old Woman Fine Wovin'
(dammit, gone Fudd again)
posted by wendell at 7:13 PM on July 20, 2004


Gotcha, You Obnoxiously Weird Filter Wetters.
posted by wendell at 7:14 PM on July 20, 2004


admit it, it's the people you hate most who keep you coming back, at least partly.

Not even the teeniest, tiniest bit.
posted by rushmc at 7:15 PM on July 20, 2004


I like XQUZYPHYR and hama7 and amberglow. I think Seth is a kid. I like Ethereal Bligh. I like jonmc too. I miss Ignatius J. Reilly.
posted by mcsweetie at 7:18 PM on July 20, 2004


please somebody hurry up the election !
posted by sgt.serenity at 7:26 PM on July 20, 2004


"We shall see how he fares in THUNDERDOME!"

Two men enter one man.

*leaves*
posted by mr_crash_davis at 7:39 PM on July 20, 2004


I wish my town was closer to the towns of other MeFites. I'd like to meet a lot of you face-to-face so we could realize, mutually, that we're all pretty good people, capable of both civility and aplomb. Then we could get drunk and trash the place.
posted by dhoyt at 7:40 PM on July 20, 2004


and talk shit about hama7!
posted by quonsar at 7:44 PM on July 20, 2004


and burn f_and_m in effigy!
posted by dhoyt at 7:48 PM on July 20, 2004


Stan Brakhage's The Act of Seeing With One's Own Eyes was surprisingly undisturbing, despite consisting entirely of real autopsy footage. I came away feeling fragile and realising how the meat left behind is so very meaningless.

Sorry, what were we talking abotu?
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 7:51 PM on July 20, 2004


Well, I'm just waiting for Seth and Amberglow to start yelling at each other to the point where they both embrace each other passionately and I have turn my gaze away* and try to drown out the noisemaking.

* because that's what gentlement do...after we set up the webcams and charge people 39.99 a month to view the material
posted by Stynxno at 7:52 PM on July 20, 2004


Snark quotient very high, good-hearted attempts to encourage niceness quotient very high. Hmm. Nurse, I think this current flare-up has almost run its course.

Too bad it's a chronic condition with no known cure. Where's my gin and tonic? I can't be expected to work under these conditions.

Thanks, mcsweetie!
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:01 PM on July 20, 2004


Don't do it, i_cola!!!
posted by scarabic at 8:03 PM on July 20, 2004


Well, I'm just waiting for Seth and Amberglow to start yelling at each other to the point where they both embrace each other passionately and I have turn my gaze away* and try to drown out the noisemaking.

* because that's what gentlement do...after we set up the webcams and charge people 39.99 a month to view the material

as long as i get 70%...and points ; >
posted by amberglow at 8:11 PM on July 20, 2004


completely invalidating the adjective "indescribably." : TGC, your humor is so droll. ;-P
posted by mischief at 8:17 PM on July 20, 2004


Give Yourself Over to Wolfdaddy, Filthy Whore?

See, if everyone did this, there'd be NO problems. I'd see to it. But spacecoyote's a start.

*warms up the implements*
posted by WolfDaddy at 8:28 PM on July 20, 2004


Thanks, mischief. I don't care what anyone says: I think you're alright ;)
posted by The God Complex at 8:36 PM on July 20, 2004


Grain Yoda Oscillates With Fag-Happy W.!
posted by muckster at 9:13 PM on July 20, 2004


seriously, hama7, under the effects of what substance did you arrive at the conclusion that this stunt was a good idea?
posted by mcsweetie at 9:24 PM on July 20, 2004


Gestalt Youthful Ontologies Wither From Wanking!
posted by freebird at 9:39 PM on July 20, 2004


Gibbering Yokels Open Wide For W
posted by quonsar at 9:45 PM on July 20, 2004


seriously, hama7, under the effects of what substance did you arrive at the conclusion that this stunt was a good idea?
posted by mcsweetie at 9:24 PM PST on July 20


Probably something at least as strong as what he was on when he said this:

"Please cite a single instance of bias in the way FOX reports the news. There is none."

But what do I know? I'm drunk.
posted by lazaruslong at 9:58 PM on July 20, 2004


See, this is what happens when Matt says he's behind a firewall where he can't access the site.
posted by smackfu at 10:15 PM on July 20, 2004


Goodnight young, obnoxious, wily, foolish wippersnappers
posted by strangeleftydoublethink at 10:36 PM on July 20, 2004


*cough*
posted by trharlan at 11:12 PM on July 20, 2004


Do we get to choke on a bucket o' cocks yet?
posted by chrid at 1:43 AM on July 21, 2004


A thousand?? I don't have the womb...
posted by i_cola at 2:54 AM on July 21, 2004


The sometimes cry of the heterosexual female:

"Gays, You Only Wish Fucked Women."
posted by Blue Stone at 3:45 AM on July 21, 2004


Get Your Own W---? Fucking Weblog.
posted by crunchland at 6:25 AM on July 21, 2004


But why are the posts shit? Because they are technically op/eds? Furthermore, all of the posts violate the basic premise of what a post should be: something new and interesting, that isn't found at major resources.

Never Say Never
Seth, Matt has approved basically every site rule violation when the thread is interesting and or has lead to a good discussion in the comments.

Why is amberglow being piled on for critiquing? As he did participate in the thread. See no wrong comments in a discussion thread except for the ones that are trying to win an their argument. The wrong there may be an argument is winning over one’s view which usually makes it personal, all about me. Or, the person reading it feels a personal attack on self. Unlike a discussion which can be a conversation discussed in a civil manner with equal and or unequal views. Which I have found to be the most interesting conversations in The World.
posted by thomcatspike at 6:31 AM on July 21, 2004


Sorry hama7….read the thread's posted link last week. The article's ideas were worthlessly weak.
posted by thomcatspike at 6:34 AM on July 21, 2004


Is this MeTa post, as well as the referring link in the Blue a bit of performance art by Hama7? A single link post to an op-ed piece? Clearly, he knows better.

I have had my run-ins with him, and I tend to believe that he's a heartless SOB that is not only still fighting some bizzaro alternate universe Cold War but also seems to have running internal dialogue with Trotsky, Marx and Taylor, that occasionaly makes its way onto the Blue. But his FPPs, particularly his photo weblog posts in the blue indicate that he is a person of some sensibility. There has to be something else at work there. I'm almost inclined to believe that he's just a troll and doesn't really believe anything he writes, but posts as he does just to get a rise out of people. Anyone else have a theory? From a certain standpoint, perhaps you can give someone who lives in South Korea a little latitude as far as the communist paranoia goes, but it still irritates me that someone who lives abroad would have a such an interest in supporting an administration with such a vicious domestic agenda, if he were anything other than a spiteful asshole. Anyone else have theory?
posted by psmealey at 6:54 AM on July 21, 2004


yeah, because he can't just be someone with ideas different to psmealy - he must be given a label so that we can all go back to sleep.
posted by andrew cooke at 7:24 AM on July 21, 2004


sarcasm works really well in print. Oh, wait. No it doesn't.
posted by psmealey at 7:37 AM on July 21, 2004


So the new vogue is not that we get a new MeTa thread anytime someone tells someone else to fuck off, but whenever someone posts a thread and doesn't like how it turns out?

Really, there could be exceptions, but if you're posting a MeTa callout about your own thread, it's probably a sign there was a problem with posting the Blue thread in the first place.
posted by soyjoy at 7:48 AM on July 21, 2004


Anyone else noticed that hama7 has not posted a single comment to either the original thread or this MeTa one? This all seems really voyeuristic.
posted by mikeh at 7:49 AM on July 21, 2004


What Andrew said.

Get out more, psmealey, see the world, hang out with people outside your demographic, talk about their worldview, visit their church, read their books, or just drive ten short miles away note the wildly diverse opinions from one human to the next, from point A to point B. In short: take the blinders off. If you still don't like what you see, fine, but please stop perpetuating that the definition of a "troll" is someone who doesn't share your opinions.


Wait--am I being sarcastic? Maybe I'm just trolling. I don't even know anymore. *pouts*
posted by dhoyt at 7:50 AM on July 21, 2004


Anyone else have a theory?

He's Adam Yoshida's mini-me. Grown in a vat. That's my theory.
posted by octobersurprise at 7:59 AM on July 21, 2004


I'm sure I deserve those criticisms at times, dhoyt. My point, which I admit could have been better articulated, is that I think Hama7 doesn't so much spout different opinions from mine on the Blue, it's that he throws up strawmen to reframe a discussion and then runs away, only to return with additional (and usually irrelevant) links to Op-Ed pieces on foxnews, newsmax, washtimes, or else throws in red herring and out of context quotes from Marx, Engels, Durkheim etc.

I'm the last person to shout anyone down because they have a view that differs from mine, I like a good fight. But I do have a problem with people that use intellectually dishonest tactics or otherwise cheap devices to further an agenda than engage in reasoned and dignified debate. Take for example, someone like MidasMulligan, who does raise the ire of some of the folks on the Blue from time to time. For my own part, I rarely agree with him, but is clearly an intelligent and courteous person who does debate the issues on the merits. Based on his otherwise good taste, my supposition was that Hama7 has it within him to do this as well, but for whatever reason, chooses not to.
posted by psmealey at 8:03 AM on July 21, 2004


This all seems really voyeuristic.

*exposes self out window*

maybe now he'll be satisfied.
posted by jonmc at 8:11 AM on July 21, 2004


Nah, I know what you mean, psmealey. Hama's a smart guy and it's disappointing to see him posting Nat'l Review links he knows don't contribute much. You sound a hell of a lot more reasonable that most who float the "troll" epithet so freely 'round here. In his defense, I don't think hama gets particularly nasty in his arguements, though, and in non-political threads seems like a genuinely okay guy. Frankly, one's politics don't usually matter to me unless they're pepetually trying to ram them down my throat--on the front pages of Metafilter, via email, on the subway, in line at the DMV, wherever.
posted by dhoyt at 8:35 AM on July 21, 2004


You know, I still have a hard time believing no one else has noticed that rodii's back. Or at least dropped by to say hi.

stavros, was he in your dream?
posted by languagehat at 8:48 AM on July 21, 2004


I saw the best minds of my generation
Destroyed by madness, starving, hysterical
I should be allowed to glue my poster
I should be allowed to think

I should be allowed to glue my poster
I should be allowed to think
I should be allowed to think
I should be allowed to think
And I should be allowed to blurt the merest idea
If by random whim, one occurs to me
If necessary, leave paper stains on the grey utility pole

I saw the worst bands of my generation
applied by magic marker to dry wall
I should be allowed to shoot my mouth off
I should have a call in show

I should be allowed to glue my poster
I should be allowed to think
I should be allowed to think
I should be allowed to think
And I should be allowed to blurt the merest idea
If by random whim, one occurs to me
If necessary, leave paper stains on the grey utility pole

I am not allowed
To ever come up with a single original thought
I am not allowed
To meet the criminal government agent who oppresses me

I was the worst hope of my generation
Destroyed by madness, starving, hysterical
I should be allowed to share my feelings
I should be allowed to feel

I should be allowed to glue my poster
I should be allowed to think
I should be allowed to think
I should be allowed to think
And I should be allowed to blurt the merest idea
If by random whim one occurs to me
But sadly, this can never be

I am not allowed to think
I am not allowed to think
posted by darukaru at 9:01 AM on July 21, 2004


> And I should be allowed to blurt the merest idea
> If by random whim one occurs to me

If they think that's thinking, they need to think again.


> I should be allowed to glue my poster
> I should be allowed to think

Incompatible. Once one starts thinking, one loses interest in posters. Mefi posters take note.
posted by jfuller at 9:20 AM on July 21, 2004


I was surprised to learn that those are the lyrics to a TMBG song. I would have guessed Weezer.
posted by psmealey at 9:54 AM on July 21, 2004


If they think that's thinking,

...they've got another think coming.

Alternate version: If they thing that's thinging, they've got another thing coming.
posted by soyjoy at 9:55 AM on July 21, 2004


Come on, can't we just get beyond Thunderdome?
posted by Otis at 11:07 AM on July 21, 2004


Crooooooooooooooow!
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 11:30 AM on July 21, 2004


Alternate version: If they thing that's thinging, they've got another thing coming.

But out there is a fortune, waiting to be had. If you I'll let it go, you're mad.
posted by jonmc at 11:39 AM on July 21, 2004


They Might Be Giants and Allen Ginsberg should never, ever have anything to do with each other. Ever.

Also, posting song lyrics on MeFi—hell, quoting song lyrics, ever, anywhere—should be resisted at all costs, excepting those who are still in their adolescence.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 12:26 PM on July 21, 2004


...or have somehow managed to extend their adolescence into their mid thirties, through the revitalising power of MUSIC!

EB, old before his time...
posted by inpHilltr8r at 7:52 PM on July 21, 2004


Hey, I just realized that the strawman accusation is itself a strawman. I mean, look, it's turtles all the way down! ;-P
posted by mischief at 8:29 PM on July 21, 2004


Metafilter: Liberal HomoCommie Massmind
posted by bob sarabia at 9:47 PM on July 21, 2004


MetaFilter: Thanks for your mediocre variation on a stale 111 half-witticism.
posted by y2karl at 10:28 PM on July 21, 2004


MetaFilter: Thanks for your mediocre variation on a stale 111 half-witticism.

Metafilter : never missing a chance to scurry in and take a cheap shot.

Anyone else have a theory?

No, I think you're pretty much bang on. Except I don't believe he lives in Korea any more. Such a loss for the peninsula.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:03 PM on July 21, 2004


EB, old before his time...

Hey, I turn forty in a few months. I'm entitled.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 11:47 PM on July 21, 2004


mischief, I do think that word means what you think it means. A strawman is an intentionallly weak or sham argument set up to be easily refuted, or in the sense I have used it above, a rephrasing, oversimplification (reductio ad absurdum) to cheaply poke holes in your adversary's point of view and derail or sabotage the discussion.
posted by psmealey at 6:57 AM on July 23, 2004


Btw, I am now officially a fan of Hama7. He just never stops making my point for me. (winks and points finger at Hama7)... I owe you one, bud.
posted by psmealey at 9:35 AM on July 23, 2004


me too EB, but come on...it's not like we're gonna die--it's just that we become middleaged.

You can't get what you want
Till you know what you want
; >
posted by amberglow at 11:04 AM on July 23, 2004


I personally think hama7's political views are pretty goddamned unsupportable.

Nevertheless, I also encourage him and anyone else here to continue to post links to thoughtful and interesting web pieces, including op-ed pieces. Really, folks...there's nothing to fear from ideas foreign to you. Many of these posts are obviously provocative, and often represent ideas well worth at least considering, regardless of whether they happen to be typical right-wing bullshit or left-wing truth and light.

~big wink~

and burn f_and_m in effigy!
posted by dhoyt at 7:48 PM PST on July 20


Oh, dear, dhoyt. One supposes before we could expect you to even think about participating in that particular barbecue (and landsakes, I do love a good roast, you know!), we will have to do something about your spine problem, given that this is about the umpteenth time you've felt the need to whine about me (or should we just call it "stirring shit?") behind my back, along with similar skulking behavior toward other users.

Have you considered an implant?

~chuckle~
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 12:13 AM on July 24, 2004


« Older All MetaFilter Comments by [Me...  |  The pancakes are getting incre... Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments