What's the "usual" amount of research involved in an FPP?

April 22, 2005 7:42 AM

How much leg work/research is common for a FPP? I had my first and I admit I didn't do much - as evidenced by the subsequent discussion. I was just happy to find something that came up empty on Search Metafilter.
posted by tvjunkie to etiquette/policy at 7:42 AM (15 comments total)

The best way around this is to only post newsfilter, and make pure it's a breaking story.
posted by orthogonality at 7:54 AM on April 22, 2005

None of my FPPs have been the result of "leg work/research". I don't really have the time or motivation for it. That's why when I do bother to post, it's usually just a link to a peculiar video or something. Other people love putting those posts together and quite often I love them for it.

I don't see anything wrong with your post at all. Well done, I say.
posted by Witty at 7:55 AM on April 22, 2005

as evidenced by the subsequent discussion.

I think that's actually pretty cool: you found an interesting story, other people with more knowledge on the AI in question came in with materials and viewpoints different from your link that added more dimensions to the whole thing. Looks like a demonstration of "weblog as conversation" to me.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 8:04 AM on April 22, 2005

r = ilj/nhdfxq

where

r = amount of research necessary
i = how interesting the topic is to those that are likely to be interested
l = the number of people who are likely to be interested
j = the likelihood of you being insomnia_lj
n = notoriety of the subject
h = how funny the post is without the addition of context
d = the likelihood that the post will be deleted
f = the likelihood that interest in the post will be diminished by a devastatingly contentious news filter post
x = the odds of your having accidentally made an inclusion that will lead to your post being snarked to a timely flaming death
q = the likelihood that quonsar is watching you
posted by nthdegx at 8:27 AM on April 22, 2005

I call this the riljnhdfxq equation.
posted by nthdegx at 8:29 AM on April 22, 2005

Thanks Witty & PST. I was not so much unhappy with the post, just feeling remiss in not checking for more background.
posted by tvjunkie at 8:30 AM on April 22, 2005

nthdegx - ROTFL

Any family link to Lewis Carrol?
posted by tvjunkie at 8:43 AM on April 22, 2005

Yeah yeah! My Mum's read all his books.
posted by nthdegx at 8:46 AM on April 22, 2005

thanks for asking this, i was thinking about asking the same thing.
I spent a beautiful Sunday researching my knives post, around 8 or 9 hours. Probably a bit much. In the end, nobody commented past my first (and admittedly most interesting) link.

That said, just because no one commented on the other links doesn't mean it wasn't read or appreciated. And I learned alot from the research. In hindsight though, it could have easily been a one-link FPP.

And I just always assume quonsar is watching...
posted by hellbient at 8:59 AM on April 22, 2005

hellbient writes "And I just always assume quonsar is watching..."

He watches over all of us. Not a sparrow falls without quonsar knowing it.
posted by orthogonality at 9:19 AM on April 22, 2005

I think it was a good post as well. Posts aren't meant to indicate your massive mastery of a subject, but to provide an interesting link. Some people may already know the link. Such is life. And some people may knot know the link, but may know much about the subject. Such is life. There's no responsibility to be an expert on a subject you link to, just to be reasonably informed (to avoid linking sites that say the utterly, completely obvious).
posted by Bugbread at 9:24 AM on April 22, 2005

typically, i just post an interesting link. as far as i know, that's what this place is about. find something really good on the net you want to share? post it. no more research necessary.

in your case, you were a bit unlucky. cyc has been around forever and has something of a bad reputation in many places. so a lot of the people who might comment on it either wouldn't bother, or are critical. one solution to that is to only post links in subject areas you know well, but i think that's too restrictive.

so it was an ok post. you were a bit unlucky. i wouldn't seat it. try again. :o)
posted by andrew cooke at 9:50 AM on April 22, 2005

I ask on #mefi when I think I might have a good post. They always tell me the right answer very quickly.

Which is why I only have one post on the blue.
posted by grouse at 11:03 AM on April 22, 2005

Please don't "Post Pad". Thank you.
posted by ColdChef at 5:49 PM on April 22, 2005

Please learn to recognize a nicely researched, non-padded post when you see one. Thank you.
posted by mediareport at 9:09 PM on April 22, 2005