All the usual suspects say all the usual things and call each other names.

June 15, 2005 4:10 PM

The Schiavo post is crap. The resulting thread is worse. The thread contains examples of everything wrong with MetaFilter, excepting the downtime. All the usual suspects say all the usual things and call each other names. Make it stop, daddy, it hurts.
posted by Ethereal Bligh to Etiquette/Policy at 4:10 PM (43 comments total)

Allow me to be the first to say you've over-reacted, even if I agree that amberglow no longer seems to be even trying in his posts to engage the folks here who might disagree with him.
posted by mediareport at 4:16 PM on June 15, 2005

Isn't this still being discussed only one post down?
posted by interrobang at 4:19 PM on June 15, 2005

Y'know I've come across a great deal of MeFi threads over the years I determined to be crap. My solution was to pass them and move to threads that were of more interest to me personally. I didn't think to make a MetaTalk thread every time I saw a MeFi thread to which I took umbrage. The glass is not half empty or half full. MeFi's as good as the people who participate. If there was as much wrong with MeFi as some people claim, we wouldn't keep coming back to this place. MeFi has been in existence over five years, which in 'Net time is impressive.

Quite simply Bligh, MeFi deserves a little bit more patience and respect than you're expressing at the moment.
posted by ZachsMind at 4:20 PM on June 15, 2005

Make it stop, daddy

Is that you, mathowie's baby?
posted by timeistight at 4:21 PM on June 15, 2005

Note that I've never posted a MeTa callout before. True, the post and thread are not earth-shatteringly horrifying, but I do think they're full of almost pure, distilled, everyday this-makes-metafilter-suck-ass nonsense.

The post was a link to a major (and overplayed) news story. It was also a Grudge Post. It was also an editorial. Then came the wonderful comments by some of metafilter's most delightful personalities.

I'm so very happy that it spawned three timeouts.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 4:28 PM on June 15, 2005

If callouts for this Schiavo post end up pushing my MeFiNYC meetup thread off the front page within a day, I'll pout a bunch!
posted by caitlinb at 4:28 PM on June 15, 2005

BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!
posted by quonsar at 4:45 PM on June 15, 2005

BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!

Terri? That you?
posted by UKnowForKids at 4:52 PM on June 15, 2005

caitlinb: If that happens just do as the brits do and start a whole new thread.
posted by mlis at 4:52 PM on June 15, 2005

If callouts for this Schiavo post end up pushing my MeFiNYC meetup thread off the front page within a day, I'll pout a bunch!

Can you strut and bat your eyelashes, too, cause that'd be really....neat.
posted by jonmc at 4:53 PM on June 15, 2005

"Note that I've never posted a MeTa callout before."

Duly noted.

I've gotten into the habit of not posting FPPs at all. My last one was October of 2004. I haven't posted a FPP to MetaTalk in over a year. I freely respond to other FPPs. With only a little patience, I find that someone else will inevitably post about a topic that's of interest to me at the time, often before I think to compose a FPP anyway.

I reserve the choice to post an FPP in the future IF I feel it's warranted, but odds are when I do, several people out there will respond by telling me it wasn't warranted. That's happened to me so many times I've gotten gunshy and rather embittered about it. It's really quite a pain in the ass to have to defend oneself every single freakin' FPP.

There's more than enough people posting FPPs. Don't be one of them. You'll enjoy MeFi much more thoroughly if you just ignore whatever thread annoys you at the moment.
posted by ZachsMind at 4:54 PM on June 15, 2005

I was thinking more along the lines of "stamp my widdle foot," actually, jonmc. Is that OK?
posted by caitlinb at 5:01 PM on June 15, 2005

Isn't this still being discussed only one post down?

Is sure is. Which makes this post entirely absurd.

You'll enjoy MeFi much more thoroughly if you just ignore whatever thread annoys you at the moment.

Indeed. Much better than trying to suppress what you don't care for or arguing in the blue about community standards that should be argued here, including making new posts about a subject for which a post already exists at the top of the current front page. But even that, is so freqently just an error by the poster and it will be fixed by he and/or they that fix these things.
posted by juiceCake at 5:09 PM on June 15, 2005

Terri? That you?

Oh, man. Quick, tasteless and apropos.. Nice!
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 5:15 PM on June 15, 2005

Terri? That you?

no, she's been dead for 20 years. didn't doctor Frist tell you?
posted by matteo at 5:28 PM on June 15, 2005

I'm so very happy that it spawned three timeouts.

So, basically you're nothing but a little tattle-tale?
posted by angry modem at 8:01 PM on June 15, 2005

BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!
Terri? That you?

HAH! Well played! THIS is what MeTa needs more of!
posted by jmd82 at 8:03 PM on June 15, 2005

Hey man, I made the Shaivo Post callout thread De Jour. Even though I only read the one comment.

But I definetly agree that the timeouts were in order.
posted by delmoi at 8:26 PM on June 15, 2005

In Defense of Crappy Editorializing NewsFilter Posts

All day today I enjoyed watching this FPP about Muslims in the Netherlands develop. It was an intelligent discussion over an important issue, with people respectfully engaging one another and bringing new facts and viewpoints to the table. Given the controversial topic, I kept expecting it to go to hell. Longbaugh said early on "I predict more violence and harsh words being exchanged, and that's just the thread." I thought so too, but it never happened. Metafilter at its very best.

Now I realize the reason--the usual suspects were otherwise engaged. They couldn't resist the Schiavo bait! I had always hated the AgendaFilter posts, but I was wrong. They serve as flypaper. The rest of us could talk, while the troublemakers rode the equivalent of the Metafilter short bus. We need a Schiavo type post every six hours!
posted by LarryC at 8:31 PM on June 15, 2005

Y'know, EB, some people come to MeFi specifically for threads like Schiavo, yet you want to deny them!? ;-P
posted by mischief at 8:44 PM on June 15, 2005

LarryC may be right, but it could be a bit more complicated.

I wrote one comment for the "Dead lady" thread and totally avoided the Muslims in Netherlands post. My reason was a little different, though.

The Shiavo thread was quite tedious until dios decided to make a comment about the quality of it, and I couldn't help myself.

The Muslims and Netherlands post... well, jenleigh has written prodigiously about Muslims and I have tried to make comments about that. After the French/Muslim comments in this thread, paraphrasing "increase in middle east males raping french women", I decided to make my enquiries, post some findings and they were conveniently ignored. So what's the point of discussing this kind of thing?

I see the Netherlands post has spawned some nice comments, but I believe that any kind of evidence or argument will not illuminate jenleigh's crusade. Now that's an intelligent discussion; good for the bystanders, neutral for the participants.
posted by gsb at 11:33 PM on June 15, 2005

"So, basically you're nothing but a little tattle-tale?"

No, I'm an angry sociopath. Why do you ask?
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 11:57 PM on June 15, 2005

The endless whining on MetaTalk is crap. The resulting threads are worse. These threads contains examples of everything wrong with MetaFilter, excepting the downtime. All the usual suspects say all the usual things and call each other names. Make it stop, daddy, it hurts.

I agree with Zachsmind. I don't post FPPs and I have no intention of doing so as long as I know that the result will almost certainly involve at least 20% bitching about exactly why, in the opinion of the resident arbiters of anality, my post fails to measure the hell up to their preferences.

Shut up. For God's sake shut up. Don't fucking read the posts you don't like, you ineffable squealing mitherers. Lord almighty.
posted by Decani at 8:23 AM on June 16, 2005

>The endless whining on MetaTalk is crap.

>Make it stop, daddy, it hurts.

>These threads contains examples of everything wrong with MetaFilter, excepting the downtime.

>Shut up. For God's sake shut up. Don't fucking read the posts you don't like, you ineffable squealing mitherers.

Pot, meet Kettle.
posted by gsb at 9:04 AM on June 16, 2005

It was also a Grudge Post. It was also an editorial.

Calling it a grudge is reading into amber's motivations. It may very well have been, but I'm just saying that you're commenting on him, not the post at that point. The editorializing is pretty evident in the last sentence, but it's a more or less forgettable comment. I actually found the autopsy results worth reporting, after all the hullaballoo we went through over that bag of flesh. Naturally, the comments that followed were shameful. Several kids shit in the sandbox and Matt had to call their mothers. If we make that amber's fault, again, we're kinda reading into it: he knew that would happen and he did it anyway.... etc. I just think the man is a softie and his heart is moved by stuff like Schiavo. While I share nothing in common with that, it's kinda hard for me to chalk up his ingenuousness to a grudge.
posted by scarabic at 9:53 AM on June 16, 2005

Calling it a grudge is reading into amber's motivations.

Two political sides argue over what is, at least partially, a factual debate. One side is eventually proven right.

A new FPP allows us to say what about it?
Intentional or not, IMHO, this was I-told-you-so-filter. I am not, however, saying that this is wholly inappropriate. Too often do these debates run on with people making the most outrageous claims, and when it's all said and done, and the evidence comes in, we've moved on to the next debate and the naysayers say "oh come on, drop it already". Hell, that's the new MO. Did Bush do full military service? C'mon now, let's live in the present. How convenient.

I-told-you-so-filter is a natural consequence of having no update mechanism, aside from posting to a dead thread. I mean hey, some sites of this type renew threads when someone posts to them, regardless of age. I would not want to see that for MeFi, but there's always going to be this natural impulse to update a thread, especially once evidence has come in on a contentious subject. And yes, there will be little to say except "I told you so".
posted by dreamsign at 3:28 PM on June 16, 2005

Calling it a grudge is reading into amber's motivations.

And Michael Jackson has no interest in little boys. He might sleep with them, have adult 'alarms', and give them jesus juice, but really, how do we know?

Please, are you really that naive scarabic, or just that big a fan of amberglow.

Amberglow from the beginning has never cared for metafilter or what's best for metafilter. Hate the south/christians/conservatives has been amberglows agenda since he joined (fanatically so), and it's members like you who give him a free pass that allows him to continue.

He's made metafilter his own little playground, which is fine, matt doesn't give a fuck, but don't pretend he hasn't.
posted by justgary at 3:44 PM on June 16, 2005

bullshit, justgary...and you're late--the other boys were all trashing me yesterday.

dreamsign: exactly. I've been asking for UpdateFilter for ages.
posted by amberglow at 5:09 PM on June 16, 2005

Amber, you have very narrow and sometimes stereotypical views on a whole bunch of things that are alien to your politics, environment, and subculture. Well, so do we all. But it occurs to most of us from time to time, and we worry, that this may be the case. And we don't post every day to MetaFilter.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 5:15 PM on June 16, 2005

what justgary said is not true, and a look at my posting history shows that. And that post was an Update, not a grudge--and clearly labeled as such. My words were not aimed at other MeFi members, and there was absolutely no call for personal attacks. BTW, there was absolutely no call for this post either since the post immediately below is about the same thing.

Furthermore, what does this even mean, EB? ...things that are alien to your politics, environment, and subculture.
posted by amberglow at 5:41 PM on June 16, 2005

amberglow : "BTW, there was absolutely no call for this post either since the post immediately below is about the same thing."

Er...yes and no. The post below was ostensibly about Witty's comment, not the thread in general. Then EB posted this thread, about the entire thread. Then the post below mutated from a discussion of Witty's comment to a discussion about the thread in general. So there is no purpose to this post now, but that wasn't the case when it was made.
posted by Bugbread at 6:12 PM on June 16, 2005

Seems self-explanatory to me. I don't think you know as much about the groups you frequently criticize as you think you do. I think you're heavily influenced by confirmation bias. I suspect that the particular subculture I suspect you largely inhabit (New York, leftist, gay, Jewish) is about as far seperated from your frequent targets as is possible in the US. Maybe not. My perceptions of your subculture are stereotypical and shouldn't be trusted too much.

However, regardless of the reasons why you have very stereotypical views of the groups you criticize, I think I can say with quite a bit of assurance that you do have very stereotypical views of the groups you criticize. I agree with most of your positions, and I think you're a good and (mostly) kind person; but my long-term evaluation of your contributions here on MetaFilter is that your views about the groups of people you consider your enemies (and I mean that term both loosely, in the same way that I consider, say, very conservative Republicans to be my "enemies", and tightly, in the same way I consider racists to be my enemies) is less informed than it ought to be and prone to biased stereotypes.

I think this has gotten worse with you, and resulted in much worse of what I've always criticized as your NewsFilter-ish compulsions, lately because of our current government. And far be it from me to claim that anyone shouldn't be alarmed and dismayed and angry at the current US government. But it has been for you, and a lot of people, an opportunity to see all their prejudices validated. Not unlike, sadly, the way the LGF/xenophobic, bigoted right has seen 9/11 as an opportunity to see all their prejudices validated and, ultimately, their hatred sanctified. In most of what you write, I see a great deal of exactly the simple moralizing and villification that I am sure you find abhorrent in BushCo.

But, whatever. I really, really dislike your post and especially how you presented it. I think it violates the guidelines and, even if it doesn't, strongly contributes to the problem. Even so, I was more calling out the behavior in the thread than your post. Your post by itself was tolerable. The ensuing discussion was not.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 6:22 PM on June 16, 2005

I think you read more into my words than the words i actually use.
posted by amberglow at 6:44 PM on June 16, 2005

Well, he has a point. Not neccessarily applying to you, but to all of us in general. People have a tendency to think that their circle of the world is representative of all that's right with the universe, and that what's outside it is somehow wrong, and we're all guilty of that. Something to keep in mind.
posted by jonmc at 6:49 PM on June 16, 2005

amberglow, if you can't see that your Schiavo post was deliberately, unnecessarily inflammatory, you're beyond hope. You're not beyond hope, so please stop pretending you don't know what was wrong with the way you phrased what could have been a perfectly fine post.

Quit trying to score points in the posts themselves; save it for the comments. The idea that aggressive, in-your-face editorializing is in the long run bad for the site is hardly a new sentiment. It's certainly a concept a member like you should be getting behind. So what gives? Is it an impulse control thing?
posted by mediareport at 7:46 PM on June 16, 2005

justgary - it's people like you who think one man's innocent friendship with children constitutes perversion that are the scourge of MeFi. I'll see your ass in the Blue when those kids are finally autopsied.
posted by scarabic at 10:46 PM on June 16, 2005

Check out justgary's comment history and tell me he's a constructive memeber of MeFi. It cracks me up that he's criticizing anybody. Look in a mirror buddy.
posted by surferboy at 6:21 AM on June 17, 2005

What EB and mediareport said. And the problem has definitely been getting worse.
posted by languagehat at 7:11 AM on June 17, 2005

a member like you should be getting behind

Puh-leeze. Can we just stop with the homo references, already?
posted by soyjoy at 8:05 AM on June 17, 2005

I think that says more about you than mediareport, soyjoy.
posted by Snyder at 9:29 AM on June 17, 2005

Oh yeah? I think that it says more about your mother than me, Snyder.

As a great American once said, this is why we can't have ironic things.
posted by soyjoy at 9:52 AM on June 17, 2005

Check out justgary's comment history and tell me he's a constructive memeber of MeFi

WTF? Care to provide examples and what % of his total comments your cherry-picking constitutes?
posted by yerfatma at 1:53 PM on June 17, 2005

ARGH! You're right. It does say more about my mother.
posted by Snyder at 4:40 PM on June 17, 2005