Discussing WalMart in Asian markets-hot, or not?

May 24, 2006 7:26 AM

Could we get a clean-up in this thread? It was a perfectly valid MetaFilter post that had a phrasing that simply asked for discussion. It nonetheless met the guidelines and should be allowed to remain without all the noise of whether or not it belongs in the blue or green. Asking for discussion is only wrong in that it's redundant. Discussion will most likely occur whether or not the post is framed as a question. So the original poster's only mistake, IMHO, was mentioning the inevitable.
posted by SeizeTheDay to Etiquette/Policy at 7:26 AM (41 comments total)

Definitely in the wrong color. All the links were news sites (and business news at that, ew) and instead of letting the discussion take place he stated he wanted it to go in his direction which I wouldn't describe as "inevitable" by any means. If you want to marry the discussion into a tight corner only AskMetafilter is good for that. That said, he does seem rather unfamiliar with the site's nuances.
posted by geoff. at 7:34 AM on May 24, 2006

I thought this post was pretty obviously a candidate for deletion but I prefer the blue when it's acting as my filter for the best of the web, and not as a discussion board. In fact the post is just a bunch of links to news stories and a request for feed back. Is it newsfilter? Is it chatfilter? Is it some weird kind of pepsi blue?

Who knows? I flagged it.

Side note. Hey Delmoi presumably you think that comments about the quality of the post belong on Metatalk. So why did you post something with no content other then a defense of the post? Shouldn't your comment also be better placed in Metatalk (witness SeizeTheDay's post)?
posted by oddman at 7:42 AM on May 24, 2006

Cleaned up. It's a perfectly valid post on metafilter, I don't know why everyone is so hung up on it being in ask metafilter. People pose questions in metafilter posts about interesting news items all the time.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 7:46 AM on May 24, 2006

You'll find that, on the blue, certain usernames pop up repeatedly (usually early in each thread) to discuss the post's merits rather than its content.
posted by cribcage at 7:46 AM on May 24, 2006

What geoff said. Posters have no right to demand, "discuss aspect X of the links" in the blue. MeFites might be far more interested in discussing aspect Y, regardless of what the original poster wants.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 7:47 AM on May 24, 2006

I objected there to the patronizing antinipponicism of some of the comments (though I'm not naming names).

And why are y'all cluttering up the Grey again with another goofy thread about clutter in the Blue?

Don't y'all learn from my mistakes?
posted by davy at 7:48 AM on May 24, 2006

Posters have no right to demand, "discuss aspect X of the links" in the blue.

This is true, when people purposely frame a discussion (usually political) and tell users how to think or answer, but jesus, this is a light-hearted little request about asian business. This isn't a post about abortion where the poster says AND NO TALKING ABOUT HOW THEY ARE MURDERING BABIES which has happened before.

Y'all are being uptight. It's an interesting story to hear Wal-Mart fail somewhere (and should be welcome news to most of MeFi's population) and the added twist that it was in Japan and lots of successful brands fail there is a curious thing. I know gen is living in Japan and grew up in the US, so he has some insider knowledge about these things and even he can't figure it out. Seems like something worth discussing rather than trying to categorize the post into other sections of the site or tell him he doesn't understand how the site works.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 7:52 AM on May 24, 2006

I said "antinipponicism"; of course I meant "antinipponism". Do forgive me.

And Matt said "Y'all are being uptight." I agree.
posted by davy at 8:12 AM on May 24, 2006

MetaFilter: I don't know why everyone is so hung up.
MetaFlter: Y'all are being uptight.
posted by kcm at 8:12 AM on May 24, 2006

I thought the links were interesting. That alone makes it a good blue post.
posted by smackfu at 8:15 AM on May 24, 2006

seriously, the outrage in that thread was ridiculous.
posted by shmegegge at 8:16 AM on May 24, 2006

Shmegegge, MOST outrage is ridiculous somehow -- and the worst atrocities are those committed as a matter of course that don't outrage enough people (cf. Arendt, e.g.). Seriously. This has little to do directly with the subject of that thread, but too much to do with "real life" in much of the world.
posted by davy at 8:30 AM on May 24, 2006

Can we discuss this outrage? How does this outrage make you feel? Would anyone like to provide links to other posts that outrage you?
posted by blue_beetle at 8:33 AM on May 24, 2006

Definitely belongs in the blue.
posted by dead_ at 8:34 AM on May 24, 2006

davy: really? I think I'm reading too much into your statemtent. I thought the outrage in that thread, now deleted, was about whether the post belonged on askme or not. I'm not sure I'm following the real life thing.
posted by shmegegge at 8:36 AM on May 24, 2006

From the thread:
I do find it curious though that we're discussing a comment I made that was deleted before I started typing this 'defense' of it; I'm not the one who brought up "HOW THEY [WERE] MURDERING BABIES", y'know. Maybe somebody with deletionary powers is "being uptight," n'est-ce pas?

I think if you're discussing a deleted comment on the blue, you should probably not.
posted by smackfu at 8:40 AM on May 24, 2006

And there ain't nothin' stopping them from doing so.

"MeFites might be far more interested in discussing aspect Y, regardless of what the original poster wants."
posted by Captaintripps at 8:47 AM on May 24, 2006

Smackfu, to quote David Letterman, "Bite me!"

And Shmegegge, I'm not sure who's reading too much into what. Maybe somebody should consult the concordance to the complete works of Jung or something. (Who wants to see my beer-based meat marinade recipe?)
posted by davy at 8:49 AM on May 24, 2006

Posters have no right to demand, "discuss aspect X of the links" in the blue.

This is true
posted by mathowie at 9:52 AM CST on May 24

This is a good point which unfortunately far too few people understand.

I can't count the number of times that people start crying about de-rails or trolling when a user reads a post and has a different view of the situation or doesn't "me-too" the post. The value of a post exists independent of the discussion and should have no ability to strictly define or limit the discussion. People should be free to have whatever reaction they want to the post.
posted by dios at 8:49 AM on May 24, 2006

Nice clipping of my sentence to remove context dios.

I said it's true in most cases. This is not one of them. It doesn't seem like an overt controlling demand that we only discuss one aspect, but I read it as a request for answers to a curious question.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 8:53 AM on May 24, 2006

I wasn't trying to remove context. I don't think what I said clashes with anything else in your comment, either.

The posters wish to talk about business dynamics in Asia is a general suggestion, but not controlling. People should be able discuss whatever they want in the thread. But the lack of the poster's ability to control the discussion doesn't foreclose the poster's ability to suggest what they are interested in regarding the topic.

Or do you take the position that because the poster stated an interest on a particular aspect of that story that any other points of emphasis would be inappropriate?
posted by dios at 8:59 AM on May 24, 2006

Matt, I think dios was agreeing with you.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 9:06 AM on May 24, 2006

posted by mr_crash_davis at 9:21 AM on May 24, 2006

I can't count the number of times that people start crying about de-rails or trolling when a user reads a post and has a different view of the situation or doesn't "me-too" the post.

What about when they argue semantics over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over?
posted by StrasbourgSecaucus at 9:38 AM on May 24, 2006

Hey Crash, whaddaya mean "Cheese-Nips"?
posted by davy at 9:47 AM on May 24, 2006

StrasbourgSecaucus, god I know what you're talking about. Lately MeFi just seems to me like a place for anal-retentive people to come either to point out semantic mistakes or to tell everybody why they're racist or something.
posted by dobie at 9:58 AM on May 24, 2006

whenever i show up late to a thread lately, it's been like, 'well, things were going well until X showed up and started complaining about the tags used for the post'.
posted by StrasbourgSecaucus at 10:14 AM on May 24, 2006

Gee, crash, it took a whole 26 minutes to get a bite on that one. Still - it worked.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 10:14 AM on May 24, 2006

Gee Kirth (not Keith? sorry if I misread), are you accusing Crash of being a "TROLL"?
posted by davy at 10:39 AM on May 24, 2006

Uh, in case anybody else missed it, my "twit" at mr_crash_davis was a JOKE. As, I'm sure, his graphic was as well.

Some o' y'all take Mefi, yourselves and/or me too seriously. I'm jes' sittin' here a-peckin' & a-grinnin', myself.
posted by davy at 10:44 AM on May 24, 2006

are you accusing Crash of being a "TROLL"?

No, I'm "NOT."
posted by Kirth Gerson at 11:00 AM on May 24, 2006

I just wanted to share my love of Cheese Nips.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 12:34 PM on May 24, 2006

I prefer Cheez-its. Nips are too small.
posted by dios at 12:42 PM on May 24, 2006

When I was a kid we had Cheese-Zits.
posted by davy at 12:55 PM on May 24, 2006

(Is it just me or is this thread kinda slow?)
posted by davy at 12:56 PM on May 24, 2006

crash, you need to broaden your snack horizons. I recommend the Instant Natural Jellyfish. Or maybe some Candy Underware. That would have to be better than a Sour Date Cake, no? I know you'd like some Crisp Pieces of Kidney, because they "contain much good-quality protein, unsaturated fatty acid, minerals and vitamins. They are able to reduce wetness and nourish spleens and are especially suitable to people who are weak in stomachs and spleens." Not that you are.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 12:56 PM on May 24, 2006

And for davy, have some Suck Jelly, it's great with Dried Pork Floss!
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:07 PM on May 24, 2006

Me, I prefer good ol' live bait. 'Cuz y'see nobody loves me, everybody hates me....
posted by davy at 5:20 PM on May 24, 2006

"Could we get a clean-up in this thread?"

"Herb! Cleanup on aisle 4!"
posted by scarabic at 8:01 PM on May 24, 2006

Why aisle 4?
posted by staggernation at 9:17 PM on May 24, 2006

You might as well ask "why 'Herb' and not 'Irv' or [snicker] 'Herv.'"
posted by scarabic at 8:12 AM on May 25, 2006