Double? June 28, 2006 1:40 PM Subscribe
You're crazy.
posted by Fidel Cashflow at 1:41 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by Fidel Cashflow at 1:41 PM on June 28, 2006
If it was posted by anyone other than S@L it would have been deleted. But matthowie feels the need to cater to certain posters lest he risk being thought of as "biased."
What he should really worry about is consistency in moderation, and while we're at it I'd like to ride a unicorn over a rainbow.
But number one is going to say "It started a decent conversation." Which is a real head-scratcher when you consider how often he and others say this place is all about the links, not the convo.
And so on and so on.
posted by bardic at 1:44 PM on June 28, 2006
What he should really worry about is consistency in moderation, and while we're at it I'd like to ride a unicorn over a rainbow.
But number one is going to say "It started a decent conversation." Which is a real head-scratcher when you consider how often he and others say this place is all about the links, not the convo.
And so on and so on.
posted by bardic at 1:44 PM on June 28, 2006
You made a FPP to make a point about another FPP. Those generally don't last.
posted by Cyrano at 1:49 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by Cyrano at 1:49 PM on June 28, 2006
So you deliberately shit on the front page to make a lame point?
posted by pardonyou? at 1:50 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by pardonyou? at 1:50 PM on June 28, 2006
I didn't think either were surprising.
Poor people like cheap stuff, and most Americans are poor.
Where's the surprise?
posted by I Love Tacos at 1:50 PM on June 28, 2006
Poor people like cheap stuff, and most Americans are poor.
Where's the surprise?
posted by I Love Tacos at 1:50 PM on June 28, 2006
Reporting on the results of a poll that occurs weekly if not daily is not front page-worthy.
posted by keswick at 1:50 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by keswick at 1:50 PM on June 28, 2006
Maybe I'm crazy, but I think [every post in this thread] is going to be like [every post in every other thread].
posted by Falconetti at 1:50 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by Falconetti at 1:50 PM on June 28, 2006
So you deliberately shit on the front page to make a lame point?
If #1 thinks the latter post is good, then I thought he'd enjoy my insightful news flash as well. My mistake.
posted by I Love Tacos at 1:51 PM on June 28, 2006
If #1 thinks the latter post is good, then I thought he'd enjoy my insightful news flash as well. My mistake.
posted by I Love Tacos at 1:51 PM on June 28, 2006
They are both ridiculously crappy posts and should be deleted.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 1:52 PM on June 28, 2006 [1 favorite]
posted by monju_bosatsu at 1:52 PM on June 28, 2006 [1 favorite]
Au contraire. They are not equally crappy. The deleted one was way more boring. We can argue for days on Walmart, but no one cares to defend Bush anymore.
posted by smackfu at 1:54 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by smackfu at 1:54 PM on June 28, 2006
I thought they were both good posts.
Then again, I am a dumbass.
posted by gigawhat? at 1:57 PM on June 28, 2006
Then again, I am a dumbass.
posted by gigawhat? at 1:57 PM on June 28, 2006
I appreciate the callout, because I wondered why the Wal-Mart one was even made, and I neglected to check LoFi. All is clearer now.
posted by yhbc at 2:00 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by yhbc at 2:00 PM on June 28, 2006
I'm really tired of people abusing MeFi to make their point. You are protesting an earlier post I didn't see yet (you assume that means approval), so you purposely make a shitty post to prove your point.
Don't disrupt MetaFilter to make your stupid point. Flag something. Email me if you want to. Start a metatalk post, but don't purposely shit in the middle of the room and then point at it and say "look, this is just as bad as what happened earlier today!"
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:00 PM on June 28, 2006 [2 favorites]
Don't disrupt MetaFilter to make your stupid point. Flag something. Email me if you want to. Start a metatalk post, but don't purposely shit in the middle of the room and then point at it and say "look, this is just as bad as what happened earlier today!"
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:00 PM on June 28, 2006 [2 favorites]
matthowie feels the need to cater to certain posters lest he risk being thought of as "biased."
Steve is banned. I love tacos is banned. Steve's been trolling the site with these turds for the past couple months, trying to get a rise of out everyone here. It's lame, and poison to community. The i love tacos account has been timed out several times in the past and this is the straw that broke the camel's back.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:07 PM on June 28, 2006
Steve is banned. I love tacos is banned. Steve's been trolling the site with these turds for the past couple months, trying to get a rise of out everyone here. It's lame, and poison to community. The i love tacos account has been timed out several times in the past and this is the straw that broke the camel's back.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:07 PM on June 28, 2006
My mistake; on checking LoFi I see that Tacos' came AFTER Steve's, and not the other way around. Hence, the wrath of Matt is appropriate, as is the tongue-lashing.
posted by yhbc at 2:08 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by yhbc at 2:08 PM on June 28, 2006
I finished a perfectly reasonable review of Wal-Mart corndogs and was unable to post it before the thread was deleted. How will I ever get that time back?
posted by Pacheco at 2:08 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by Pacheco at 2:08 PM on June 28, 2006
Boy, Matt's handing out the bans like crazy these days, huh?
posted by keswick at 2:10 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by keswick at 2:10 PM on June 28, 2006
Like crazy? Aside from spammers/self-linkers it's like 3 or 4 in the last month.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:13 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:13 PM on June 28, 2006
While the ban hammer is swinging, is dios in time out? If so, why?
posted by caddis at 2:13 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by caddis at 2:13 PM on June 28, 2006
Now I'll never be able to find out what beefaroni is. Are you opposed to continuing education, mathowie?
posted by Cranberry at 2:16 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by Cranberry at 2:16 PM on June 28, 2006
thanks matt! keep up the good work.
posted by puke & cry at 2:18 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by puke & cry at 2:18 PM on June 28, 2006
Pacheco writes "I finished a perfectly reasonable review of Wal-Mart corndogs and was unable to post it before the thread was deleted. How will I ever get that time back?"
Doesn't that drive you crazy? I had this awesome rebuttal of M_J's arguement and I lost it by previewing too much. Damn you occasional OCD.
posted by Mitheral at 2:18 PM on June 28, 2006
Doesn't that drive you crazy? I had this awesome rebuttal of M_J's arguement and I lost it by previewing too much. Damn you occasional OCD.
posted by Mitheral at 2:18 PM on June 28, 2006
dios is in a time out because he just likes to pop into threads and crap on them and I'm tired of it. But it's unfair to talk about him when he can't respond so I'd say just move on.
And actually, after calming down a bit (I really hate it when people shit on the site to prove their point), I don't see a ton of awful deleted stuff Steve's done lately, so I'll lift the ban on him. His last two posts were kind of weak pro-right wing topics and I mistook that for a giant troll. He's really laid off the site and barely ever pops in anymore.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:46 PM on June 28, 2006 [1 favorite]
And actually, after calming down a bit (I really hate it when people shit on the site to prove their point), I don't see a ton of awful deleted stuff Steve's done lately, so I'll lift the ban on him. His last two posts were kind of weak pro-right wing topics and I mistook that for a giant troll. He's really laid off the site and barely ever pops in anymore.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:46 PM on June 28, 2006 [1 favorite]
Yeah, and the other accounts he owned were also taken away for goofing around on the site earlier.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:55 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:55 PM on June 28, 2006
Kwantsar writes "You know that ILT was a sockpuppet, right, Matt?"
What?! Whose?
posted by Mitheral at 2:59 PM on June 28, 2006
What?! Whose?
posted by Mitheral at 2:59 PM on June 28, 2006
My Comments shows my comments in both of these deleted posts. I would have sworn it didn't used to do that. Is my memory faulty?
posted by smackfu at 3:09 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by smackfu at 3:09 PM on June 28, 2006
I don't see a ton of awful deleted stuff Steve's done lately, so I'll lift the ban on him . . . [ILT] and the other accounts he owned were also taken away for goofing around on the site earlier.
So not Steve's sockpuppet, right? Because that confused the shit out of me.
posted by yerfatma at 3:12 PM on June 28, 2006
So not Steve's sockpuppet, right? Because that confused the shit out of me.
posted by yerfatma at 3:12 PM on June 28, 2006
I don't get why the post was deleted ?
This post was deleted for the following reason: Not really that interesting
Uh well it's not exactly a "best of" the web finding, I concur on that. Yet the discussion that was sparked seemed good to me...certainly beats down yet another Youtube post...these are becoming kind of annoying if one thinks that youtube is the finding, rarely the single video is that big a finding. Also smells like covert advertising
posted by elpapacito at 4:20 PM on June 28, 2006
This post was deleted for the following reason: Not really that interesting
Uh well it's not exactly a "best of" the web finding, I concur on that. Yet the discussion that was sparked seemed good to me...certainly beats down yet another Youtube post...these are becoming kind of annoying if one thinks that youtube is the finding, rarely the single video is that big a finding. Also smells like covert advertising
posted by elpapacito at 4:20 PM on June 28, 2006
Yet the discussion that was sparked seemed good to me...
Any suitably provocative statement on the front page will spark discussion, maybe even good discussion. That doesn't mean the discussion is a good excuse for a dog of a link.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 4:25 PM on June 28, 2006
Any suitably provocative statement on the front page will spark discussion, maybe even good discussion. That doesn't mean the discussion is a good excuse for a dog of a link.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 4:25 PM on June 28, 2006
As opposed to a good excuse for a dog of a link ? Consider this : one may tolerate youtube or whatever IF that promotes partecipation, so that Jow First User doesn't feel excluded. 1/2 the discussion anywhere is usually derail or not strictly pertinent, which is bad, but what is worse: lack of partecipation or subquality partecipation ? Which is hardest to obtain ?
posted by elpapacito at 4:30 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by elpapacito at 4:30 PM on June 28, 2006
Man, I really felt like I knew I Love Tacos. We both loved tacos and everything.
posted by graventy at 4:55 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by graventy at 4:55 PM on June 28, 2006
Youtube is a host. You invoke youtube as if that says anything about the quality of the post; it doesn't.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 4:56 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by monju_bosatsu at 4:56 PM on June 28, 2006
don't purposely shit in the middle of the room and then point at it and say "look, this is just as bad as what happened earlier today!"
Hmm, I'm conflicted. Still, well stated.
posted by mischief at 5:00 PM on June 28, 2006
Hmm, I'm conflicted. Still, well stated.
posted by mischief at 5:00 PM on June 28, 2006
monju_bosatsu, video is inherently bad. We've been saying it for years.
posted by cortex at 5:05 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by cortex at 5:05 PM on June 28, 2006
monju_bosatsu writes "Youtube is a host. You invoke youtube as if that says anything about the quality of the post; it doesn't."
Certainly it is a host, yet it no longer is a best of the web, a rare finding or something hard to find or rarely seen. If we followed the logic that each and every content of a host is a best-of-the-web, then I could FPP each and every link on the net
A good post to MetaFilter is something that meets the following criteria: most people haven't seen it before, there is something interesting about the content on the page, and it might warrant discussion from others.
It's vague enough to allow almost anything : if the content "walmart" is cliche, then "youtube video" is fast becoming the replacement.
cortex writes "monju_bosatsu, video is inherently bad. We've been saying it for years."
You maybe, I never said that.
posted by elpapacito at 5:13 PM on June 28, 2006
Certainly it is a host, yet it no longer is a best of the web, a rare finding or something hard to find or rarely seen. If we followed the logic that each and every content of a host is a best-of-the-web, then I could FPP each and every link on the net
A good post to MetaFilter is something that meets the following criteria: most people haven't seen it before, there is something interesting about the content on the page, and it might warrant discussion from others.
It's vague enough to allow almost anything : if the content "walmart" is cliche, then "youtube video" is fast becoming the replacement.
cortex writes "monju_bosatsu, video is inherently bad. We've been saying it for years."
You maybe, I never said that.
posted by elpapacito at 5:13 PM on June 28, 2006
I was being silly, goddammit. Neither the defense of recent Youtubery nor the recent anti-Youtube whining seems entirely defensible.
posted by cortex at 5:18 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by cortex at 5:18 PM on June 28, 2006
Certainly it is a host, yet it no longer is a best of the web, a rare finding or something hard to find or rarely seen. If we followed the logic that each and every content of a host is a best-of-the-web, then I could FPP each and every link on the net
No. The point, which I think you're missing, is that youtube is neither the best nor the worst of the web. Each video posted to the front page should be judged on its own merit; the fact that youtube hosts the media is irrelevant. Not too mention that the best-of-the-web standard has been deprecated, but that's kind of beside the point.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 5:35 PM on June 28, 2006
No. The point, which I think you're missing, is that youtube is neither the best nor the worst of the web. Each video posted to the front page should be judged on its own merit; the fact that youtube hosts the media is irrelevant. Not too mention that the best-of-the-web standard has been deprecated, but that's kind of beside the point.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 5:35 PM on June 28, 2006
Are anyone else's nipples hard?
And what Mitheral said.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 6:48 PM on June 28, 2006
And what Mitheral said.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 6:48 PM on June 28, 2006
I would like someone to give me a reasonable explanation for why they think youtube should be banned but flickr should not be.
posted by empath at 7:57 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by empath at 7:57 PM on June 28, 2006
Because the youtube pictures move, and they're scary.
posted by puke & cry at 8:16 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by puke & cry at 8:16 PM on June 28, 2006
Because television. The drug of a nation. Breeding ignorance, and feeding radiation.
posted by furiousthought at 9:49 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by furiousthought at 9:49 PM on June 28, 2006
Any suitably provocative statement on the front page will spark discussion, maybe even good discussion. That doesn't mean the discussion is a good excuse for a dog of a link.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 7:25 PM EST on June 28
bears repeating.
and I LOVE TACOS IS BANNED?! Holy fuck, I didn't see that coming. I wasn't even aware of whatever earned him several timeouts recently. Does anyone have links to whatever it was he's been up to? I, apparently, have been living under a rock. And whose sock puppet was he?
posted by shmegegge at 10:01 PM on June 28, 2006
posted by monju_bosatsu at 7:25 PM EST on June 28
bears repeating.
and I LOVE TACOS IS BANNED?! Holy fuck, I didn't see that coming. I wasn't even aware of whatever earned him several timeouts recently. Does anyone have links to whatever it was he's been up to? I, apparently, have been living under a rock. And whose sock puppet was he?
posted by shmegegge at 10:01 PM on June 28, 2006
empath writes "I would like someone to give me a reasonable explanation for why they think youtube should be banned but flickr should not be."
Because we aren't seeing 2-4 flickr posts on the front page every day. If we had a MeCha like stream of "OMG! Funny" links to images on flickr on the front page I'm sure people would be railing against flickr as well.
posted by Mitheral at 8:57 AM on June 29, 2006
Because we aren't seeing 2-4 flickr posts on the front page every day. If we had a MeCha like stream of "OMG! Funny" links to images on flickr on the front page I'm sure people would be railing against flickr as well.
posted by Mitheral at 8:57 AM on June 29, 2006
Kwantsar writes "You know that ILT was a sockpuppet, right, Matt?"
What?! Whose?
Yeah, whose?
posted by bshort at 9:28 AM on June 29, 2006
What?! Whose?
Yeah, whose?
posted by bshort at 9:28 AM on June 29, 2006
Each video posted to the front page should be judged on its own merit
Banning YouTube would be like banning Geocities: sure, most of the user-created content really sucks, but that's why we have links, to go right to the good stuff.
Also: Yeah, whose, ya yahoos?
posted by sonofsamiam at 9:29 AM on June 29, 2006
Banning YouTube would be like banning Geocities: sure, most of the user-created content really sucks, but that's why we have links, to go right to the good stuff.
Also: Yeah, whose, ya yahoos?
posted by sonofsamiam at 9:29 AM on June 29, 2006
I'm afraid that information is classified cabal-only. Sorry, guys.
posted by graventy at 9:37 AM on June 29, 2006
posted by graventy at 9:37 AM on June 29, 2006
oh, then there's no problem with telling us. Because there is no cabal.
posted by shmegegge at 10:43 AM on June 29, 2006
posted by shmegegge at 10:43 AM on June 29, 2006
I am not going to out him, because I'm only 95% sure I know who he is-- similarities in syntax and content are not adequate proof.
Inky wave.
posted by Kwantsar at 10:48 AM on June 29, 2006
Inky wave.
posted by Kwantsar at 10:48 AM on June 29, 2006
But shmegegge, with the non-existence of the cabal comes the non-existence of cabal information sources.
posted by cortex at 11:06 AM on June 29, 2006
posted by cortex at 11:06 AM on June 29, 2006
That tombstone is the funniest goddamn thing I've ever seen.
HE LOVED TACOS
posted by Optimus Chyme at 4:09 PM on June 29, 2006
HE LOVED TACOS
posted by Optimus Chyme at 4:09 PM on June 29, 2006
Yes, I laughed as well. Kudos, brain_drain (I'm still curious WTF he/she was ...)
Not to summon the demons, but I vote Alex Reynolds. Is he still around in one of his forms?
posted by mrgrimm at 7:02 PM on June 29, 2006
Not to summon the demons, but I vote Alex Reynolds. Is he still around in one of his forms?
posted by mrgrimm at 7:02 PM on June 29, 2006
Alex and Tacos are different people.
Nonetheless, I'm pretty sure that Alex is indeed around, and as limber as ever, despite having aged considerably.
posted by Kwantsar at 7:21 PM on July 1, 2006
Nonetheless, I'm pretty sure that Alex is indeed around, and as limber as ever, despite having aged considerably.
posted by Kwantsar at 7:21 PM on July 1, 2006
DON'T MENTION HIS NAME!!! OTHERWISE HE'LL WRITE YOU EMAILS ABOUT HOW YOU'RE PART OF A CONSPIRACY TO TORTURE HIM!!!
posted by shmegegge at 8:40 PM on July 2, 2006
posted by shmegegge at 8:40 PM on July 2, 2006
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by I Love Tacos at 1:40 PM on June 28, 2006