URL check for double posts August 24, 2001 2:06 AM Subscribe
URL check for double posts
This post was deleted for the following reason: Poster's Request -- frimble
You know what's sad? This is already there, but people ignore it. It's true, go try to post a story to the front page with a URL that's already been used. It'll say "This URL has appeared x times in the past, are you sure you want to post it?" or something to that effect. Does this help? Apparently not.
posted by zempf at 6:15 AM on August 24, 2001
posted by zempf at 6:15 AM on August 24, 2001
Well, perhaps people ignore it, but more often than not, it appears to me that someone will post a link to a news story from, say, Yahoo, and another will post the (virtually identical) story from, say again, Salon or CNN. But the URL check is in place and has been for a while. The real question might be, "Is MetaFilter the right place for this mundane news story?"
posted by Skot at 9:18 AM on August 24, 2001
posted by Skot at 9:18 AM on August 24, 2001
The URL check doesn't help in most cases, since people post news stories from different sources, or different versions of the same thing.
Searching may not be the best way to find out if your link has been posted in some other form. Searching relies on text used in the article and comments. Posters should make an effort to look for previous versions, but should not have to be mindreaders.
I don't mind mundane news stories, but I agree with Skot's suggestion. Maybe the message back on a YahooNews URL check should be "Do you have any additional information on this story that is not widely available to post instead, e.g. a press release, local coverage, the personal website of the deranged ax murderer in question, a comment or opinion on the event in question by a voice not often heard, such as 'Grandparents for Ax Murders'."
The difference to me is rarity. Its the difference between a Salon story and a webloggers reaction to a Salon story in which she as been misquoted. Double posts are more likely if you draw links from the same sources (i.e. Yahoo newswires) as everyone else---those sources are less rare.
posted by rschram at 10:21 AM on August 24, 2001
Searching may not be the best way to find out if your link has been posted in some other form. Searching relies on text used in the article and comments. Posters should make an effort to look for previous versions, but should not have to be mindreaders.
I don't mind mundane news stories, but I agree with Skot's suggestion. Maybe the message back on a YahooNews URL check should be "Do you have any additional information on this story that is not widely available to post instead, e.g. a press release, local coverage, the personal website of the deranged ax murderer in question, a comment or opinion on the event in question by a voice not often heard, such as 'Grandparents for Ax Murders'."
The difference to me is rarity. Its the difference between a Salon story and a webloggers reaction to a Salon story in which she as been misquoted. Double posts are more likely if you draw links from the same sources (i.e. Yahoo newswires) as everyone else---those sources are less rare.
posted by rschram at 10:21 AM on August 24, 2001
What's worse, Metafilter's second line of defense against double posts keeps getting undermined. There ought to be some sort of anti-circumvention law... Oh wait. Nevermind...
posted by fooljay at 4:40 PM on August 24, 2001
posted by fooljay at 4:40 PM on August 24, 2001
People don't really take the time to research their posts, and for good reason. It's just too much fun to get skallas's panties in a bunch. We must give him something to whine about.
posted by ttrendel at 1:24 AM on August 27, 2001
posted by ttrendel at 1:24 AM on August 27, 2001
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by vanderwal at 5:26 AM on August 24, 2001