Is there an automatic identical URL detector?

January 31, 2005 12:31 PM

Facts On Farts was deleted within ten minutes of posting. In point of fact, the double post alluded to was all about turds. I checked it myself. Is there some sort of automatic feature that sniffs out identical URL's? Because this was in error, even though I was warned before posting that it looked like a duplicate (but wasn't). FWIW, the fart site actually was written to address a lot of things that any reasonable person might be curious about.
posted by docpops to etiquette/policy at 12:31 PM (28 comments total)

In point of fact, the double post alluded to was all about turds.

For my money, there's no indignation so righteous as that of somebody whose post about farts got lumped in with one about turds. But you could see how the URL sniffer could get tripped up here.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 12:44 PM on January 31, 2005

Every time I come to MetaFilter now I find comments and posts deleted (including some of my own). Let me be the first to say, this shit is wack.
posted by driveler at 12:44 PM on January 31, 2005

It was a double post - same url and everything. The original had two links, the second was the same as yours.
posted by iconomy at 12:49 PM on January 31, 2005

docpops, your post and the original post referred to seem pretty similar to me and do contain the same URL. Why do you think it isn't a double post?
posted by jessamyn at 12:49 PM on January 31, 2005

Not so much indignant as...dismayed.

If this site can help and enlighten one person as much as it did me, well, then, it should, nay, must, become my life's work.

Seriously, turds have been done to death. Farts, well, they are as mysterious as the rings of Saturn. Or Uranus.

On preview, the URL checker only brought up the Turd link. My search came up empty, using facts on farts as the keyword. I stand corrected, and will get back to work.

Fuck.
posted by docpops at 12:50 PM on January 31, 2005

Search since day one.
posted by timeistight at 12:57 PM on January 31, 2005

Man. Not that there's any reason to believe it, but I thought I did.

Sorry. Thanks.
posted by docpops at 1:15 PM on January 31, 2005

I'm glad we cleared the air of that. ;-P
posted by mischief at 1:28 PM on January 31, 2005

Also, take your farts to Fark. They are not the best of the web.
posted by rushmc at 2:46 PM on January 31, 2005

do all these people who supposedly have been lurking since just forever really NOT know about lofi and gaps in thread numbers and deletion reasons which are posted prominently in the thread? will there now be a meta thread on the topic every time a post is yanked?
posted by quonsar at 3:06 PM on January 31, 2005

It would be nice if jessamyn had an email addy so we could ask her directly if something has been deleted or to point out a problem instead of having to post here.
posted by Juicylicious at 3:23 PM on January 31, 2005

Not very nice for jessamyn.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:26 PM on January 31, 2005

Also, take your farts to Fark. They are not the best of the web.

Are too.
posted by homunculus at 3:30 PM on January 31, 2005

rushmc - thank god you arrived. I was wondering when the fark snark would come. Fact is, the site gives as thorough a desciption of the pathophysiology of flatulence as you'll likely find.

A quick read through the comments section of the original thread sums it up better than I can here, though.

I'll see what I can dig up on 17th century woodcut depictions of schizophrenia before my next attempt, though.
posted by docpops at 3:38 PM on January 31, 2005

Show email on profile page? []

Show email on profile page? [X]

emailing me is now one click closer than it was before, thanks for the reminder.
posted by jessamyn at 3:48 PM on January 31, 2005

I was wondering when the fark snark would come.

So you admit you knew better but proceeded anyway. Nice.
posted by rushmc at 5:22 PM on January 31, 2005

No, I knew enough about the mindset of some people that anything remotely scatologic would get called out. So thanks for playing.
posted by docpops at 5:53 PM on January 31, 2005

The thread was deleted cause it was stinky.

/inevitable
posted by jonmc at 6:36 PM on January 31, 2005

Let me be the first to say, this shit is wack.

Not so wack in this case. Perfectly non-wack, even.

Methinks driveler doth overstate too much.
posted by mediareport at 7:12 PM on January 31, 2005

Is it possible for a talented person to earn a living through flatulence?

Why do horse farts smell worse than people's farts?

Is it possible to leave a brown spot on your pants because of a fart, and if so, what causes it?

Is it true that a woman can fart out of her, shall we say, frontal opening, and if so, where does the gas come from?

What would happen if someone farted on Venus?

Truly, the questions an anxious nation has waited long enough to have answered.
posted by ChrisTN at 8:08 PM on January 31, 2005

No, I knew enough about the mindset of some people that anything remotely scatologic would get called out.

If you think it's the scatalogical aspect that earns it the callout...well, I suddenly understand better why you would post it in the first place.
posted by rushmc at 8:29 PM on January 31, 2005

i'm getting tired of people complaining about jessamyn when they are the ones that have fucked up.
posted by andrew cooke at 4:20 AM on February 1, 2005

Yeah, we all have a bit of chickens-with-our-heads-cut-off syndrome going on here, but I am actually kind of wondering if something strange is going on apart from that, because several people who don't strike me as being very suggestible, and who are definitely not troublemakers, have complained of missing comments — things that (I believe) Matt and Jessamyn would never delete.

At any rate, there is definitely an atmosphere of doubt at the moment, so it would probably be a good thing if some clear parameters were set forth, as much as I hate (really, really hate) the idea of it.
posted by taz at 5:01 AM on February 1, 2005

several people who don't strike me as being very suggestible, and who are definitely not troublemakers, have complained of missing comments — things that (I believe) Matt and Jessamyn would never delete.

Agreed. With a few exceptions -- notably this post -- I've been staying out of MeFi except as a commenter. I've deleted some snarks from AskMe and nothing from MeTa. I'm fairly certain I haven't deleted anything you've posted taz, for example. I'll be away and mostly offline this weekend, it will be interesting to see if things settle down a bit here.
posted by jessamyn at 6:51 AM on February 1, 2005

note: "deleted snarks that didn't answer/address the question" all question-answering snarks stayed.
posted by jessamyn at 7:05 AM on February 1, 2005

Heh. It was a good snark though. :)
posted by mediareport at 7:08 AM on February 1, 2005

emailing me is now one click closer than it was before

Thanks jessamyn!
posted by Juicylicious at 7:08 AM on February 1, 2005

Okay, jessamyn... Thanks. There are a lot of different possibilities for what is happening now. The idea that I find most alarming is the chance that there is some outside manipulation happening, but even voicing that idea makes me feel kind of foolish. The more straightforward and specific you and Matt are, the easier it will be to identify or clarify what is really happening, so thanks for your updates.
posted by taz at 8:08 AM on February 1, 2005