Can I have a sockpuppet for when I'm drunk? December 17, 2006 5:20 PM Subscribe
meditations on the naming of a sock puppet (wish there was a more inside for meta)
Why is it so difficult to type the first comment ahead of time?
posted by monju_bosatsu at 5:21 PM on December 17, 2006 [1 favorite]
posted by monju_bosatsu at 5:21 PM on December 17, 2006 [1 favorite]
i asked this question on askmefi recently. it was deleted for obvious reasons, the brunt of which said this question should be on metatalk. so here it is... revised.
in the deleted thread i asked what i should name my sock puppet. i was advised that my sock puppet should be named 'clearlyinebriatedhuman'. i kind of liked that.
so here is my idea: i have my regular username which i use to post when i am sober. as i look back at my posting history i can see that when i post being sober, my contributions help mefi become a better place.
but othertimes i am not sober. when i am not, those times i tend to post stupid or vitriolic things, or things that make mefi a more fun place for me rather than a better place in general. for those times i could use a different username: clearlyinebriatedhuman.
that way, people can take me seriously when i post as localhuman, and scroll past when they see clearlyinebriatedhuman. or, if they are into vitriol or stupidity they can read whatever clearlyinebriatedhuman writes.
for the record... i am currently uninebriated. is this a good idea? is there precedence for this? should i just not post at all while unsober? discussion appreciated.
posted by localhuman at 5:23 PM on December 17, 2006
in the deleted thread i asked what i should name my sock puppet. i was advised that my sock puppet should be named 'clearlyinebriatedhuman'. i kind of liked that.
so here is my idea: i have my regular username which i use to post when i am sober. as i look back at my posting history i can see that when i post being sober, my contributions help mefi become a better place.
but othertimes i am not sober. when i am not, those times i tend to post stupid or vitriolic things, or things that make mefi a more fun place for me rather than a better place in general. for those times i could use a different username: clearlyinebriatedhuman.
that way, people can take me seriously when i post as localhuman, and scroll past when they see clearlyinebriatedhuman. or, if they are into vitriol or stupidity they can read whatever clearlyinebriatedhuman writes.
for the record... i am currently uninebriated. is this a good idea? is there precedence for this? should i just not post at all while unsober? discussion appreciated.
posted by localhuman at 5:23 PM on December 17, 2006
Yes, it is a good idea, because clearlyinebriatedhuman can be quickly banned, and then we won't have to see the "vitriol and stupidity."
posted by grouse at 5:25 PM on December 17, 2006 [1 favorite]
posted by grouse at 5:25 PM on December 17, 2006 [1 favorite]
when i am not, those times i tend to post stupid or vitriolic things, or things that make mefi a more fun place for me rather than a better place in general. for those times i could use a different username: clearlyinebriatedhuman.
I would just like to warn you, in case you didn't know, that if clearlyinebriatedhuman does something banworthy, chances are not insignificant that you, localhuman, will also get locked out of this tepid wonderland. Plus, since you seem like such a premeditated ass about the whole thing (is that snarky? I think it's just accurate.) it's drawn attention to whichever route you decide to choose, including the "I was just funnin' y'all" direction which has been so fruitful for others in the recent past.
Unless you can think of some reason why your AskMe question and this MetaTalk question make you something other than a complete .... what is the word I am looking for here .... I would appreciate if you'd concentrate your remaining time on MetaFilter, brief though it may possibly be, learning to punctuate properly.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 5:34 PM on December 17, 2006 [13 favorites]
I would just like to warn you, in case you didn't know, that if clearlyinebriatedhuman does something banworthy, chances are not insignificant that you, localhuman, will also get locked out of this tepid wonderland. Plus, since you seem like such a premeditated ass about the whole thing (is that snarky? I think it's just accurate.) it's drawn attention to whichever route you decide to choose, including the "I was just funnin' y'all" direction which has been so fruitful for others in the recent past.
Unless you can think of some reason why your AskMe question and this MetaTalk question make you something other than a complete .... what is the word I am looking for here .... I would appreciate if you'd concentrate your remaining time on MetaFilter, brief though it may possibly be, learning to punctuate properly.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 5:34 PM on December 17, 2006 [13 favorites]
I would just own up to your ideas. Separating your sober self from your drunken self is what weak willed fucks do. Responsibilities for one's actions do not end or change in any way at the point of inebriation.
posted by Science! at 5:40 PM on December 17, 2006
posted by Science! at 5:40 PM on December 17, 2006
I vote for "premeditated ass".
posted by mr_crash_davis at 5:43 PM on December 17, 2006
posted by mr_crash_davis at 5:43 PM on December 17, 2006
I would appreciate if you'd concentrate your remaining time on MetaFilter, brief though it may possibly be, learning to punctuate properly.
lets get 3 cheers for jessamyn
posted by rossination at 5:46 PM on December 17, 2006
lets get 3 cheers for jessamyn
posted by rossination at 5:46 PM on December 17, 2006
Doesn't pre-calling-out your own future sock puppet kind of defeat the entire point of the somewhat more anonymous sock puppet in the first place?
What in the most fuckiest of all fucks? It's like the fabric of space and time itself have started vigorously and simultaneously fucking and devouring each other.
Holy crap, maybe my future selves upon didden on-when invented a time machine.
posted by loquacious at 5:48 PM on December 17, 2006 [1 favorite]
What in the most fuckiest of all fucks? It's like the fabric of space and time itself have started vigorously and simultaneously fucking and devouring each other.
Holy crap, maybe my future selves upon didden on-when invented a time machine.
posted by loquacious at 5:48 PM on December 17, 2006 [1 favorite]
What happens when you get so drunk, you accidentally use your sober alias? Will you open another thread asking for suggestions on an I'm Better Now, and I Really Mean It This Time sockpuppet?
posted by Smart Dalek at 5:52 PM on December 17, 2006
posted by Smart Dalek at 5:52 PM on December 17, 2006
What in the most fuckiest of all fucks? It's like the fabric of space and time itself have started vigorously and simultaneously fucking and devouring each other.
I blame Dick Fofuckey.
posted by danb at 6:02 PM on December 17, 2006
I blame Dick Fofuckey.
posted by danb at 6:02 PM on December 17, 2006
three cheers for me not posting while drunk, abandoning that sockpuppet idea of yesterweek, and making a concerted effort to be a user who only contributes in an effort to make mefi better.
i'm quite sorry i've offended jessamyn in such a way. she's cool, and perhaps she'll be cooler knowing that there will never be a clearlyinebriatedhuman.
posted by localhuman at 6:07 PM on December 17, 2006
i'm quite sorry i've offended jessamyn in such a way. she's cool, and perhaps she'll be cooler knowing that there will never be a clearlyinebriatedhuman.
posted by localhuman at 6:07 PM on December 17, 2006
*cheers*
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:10 PM on December 17, 2006
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:10 PM on December 17, 2006
thanks localhuman.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 6:20 PM on December 17, 2006 [1 favorite]
posted by mathowie (staff) at 6:20 PM on December 17, 2006 [1 favorite]
Okay, so which one of us is going to register "clearlyinebriatedhuman" for the purpose of screwing over the author of this post?
local, the 'public sockpuppet' thing is a really really really bad idea which would have offended me too, if I weren't desensitized to the sight of someone biting himself in the ass.
posted by wendell at 6:21 PM on December 17, 2006
local, the 'public sockpuppet' thing is a really really really bad idea which would have offended me too, if I weren't desensitized to the sight of someone biting himself in the ass.
posted by wendell at 6:21 PM on December 17, 2006
probably won't ever punctuate or capitalize correctly, though.
posted by localhuman at 6:21 PM on December 17, 2006
posted by localhuman at 6:21 PM on December 17, 2006
probably won't ever punctuate or capitalize correctly, though.
Fair enough.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:42 PM on December 17, 2006
Fair enough.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:42 PM on December 17, 2006
i guess this doesn't get down to the deeper issue: the practice of sockpuppetry. it seems to be a common practice (when not done publicly). any solutions to combat this problem? or are non-publicly announced sock puppets generally regarded as okay?
posted by localhuman at 6:59 PM on December 17, 2006
posted by localhuman at 6:59 PM on December 17, 2006
i guess this doesn't get down to the deeper issue: the practice of sockpuppetry. it seems to be a common practice (when not done publicly). any solutions to combat this problem?
Sockpuppets are a symptom. When that symptom flares up, Matt and Jess address the root cause.
posted by mendel at 7:07 PM on December 17, 2006 [1 favorite]
Sockpuppets are a symptom. When that symptom flares up, Matt and Jess address the root cause.
posted by mendel at 7:07 PM on December 17, 2006 [1 favorite]
What's the root cause?
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 7:13 PM on December 17, 2006 [1 favorite]
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 7:13 PM on December 17, 2006 [1 favorite]
"Boredom, Tyler. Boredom - that's what's wrong. And how do you beat boredom, Tyler?... Adventure. Adventure, Tyler."
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:15 PM on December 17, 2006
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:15 PM on December 17, 2006
I've been meaning to tell you all for years...
posted by clearlyinebriatedhuman at 11:16 ACTS on December 18 [+][!]
Thank you for not doing this.
posted by Pollomacho at 7:17 PM on December 17, 2006
posted by clearlyinebriatedhuman at 11:16 ACTS on December 18 [+][!]
Thank you for not doing this.
posted by Pollomacho at 7:17 PM on December 17, 2006
I generally don't go in for this but in my opinion jess just won the whole goddam tag line game with -
Metafilter:this tepid wonderland
posted by edgeways at 7:20 PM on December 17, 2006
Metafilter:this tepid wonderland
posted by edgeways at 7:20 PM on December 17, 2006
I think this is the smartest thing Science! has ever posted.
posted by muddgirl at 7:27 PM on December 17, 2006
posted by muddgirl at 7:27 PM on December 17, 2006
Can I send you a case of beer?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:37 PM on December 17, 2006
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:37 PM on December 17, 2006
I think this is the smartest thing Science! has ever posted.
Even though I should have written "responsibility" instead of "responsibilities"? My greatest comment, marred by grammatical errors despite a preview.
posted by Science! at 7:38 PM on December 17, 2006
Even though I should have written "responsibility" instead of "responsibilities"? My greatest comment, marred by grammatical errors despite a preview.
posted by Science! at 7:38 PM on December 17, 2006
me? yeah. it must be dark though.
posted by localhuman at 7:39 PM on December 17, 2006
posted by localhuman at 7:39 PM on December 17, 2006
Damn, now that I read that again I seem to have made all kinds of errors that a single correction can't fix. Well, I'm a scientist not a englishist.
posted by Science! at 7:39 PM on December 17, 2006
posted by Science! at 7:39 PM on December 17, 2006
(Science!'s response got in the way of my answer to brandon's question)
posted by localhuman at 7:40 PM on December 17, 2006
posted by localhuman at 7:40 PM on December 17, 2006
Can I send you a case of beer?
I don't know. Can you? Regardless, I would accept such a fine thing.
posted by loquacious at 7:41 PM on December 17, 2006
I don't know. Can you? Regardless, I would accept such a fine thing.
posted by loquacious at 7:41 PM on December 17, 2006
i guess this doesn't get down to the deeper issue: the practice of sockpuppetry. it seems to be a common practice (when not done publicly). any solutions to combat this problem? or are non-publicly announced sock puppets generally regarded as okay?
Read the Metatalk archives. There have been many heated discussions about the wearing of socks on hands.
Matt said a couple of days ago that he secretly (well, clearly not secretly) loathes them. Many agree. Amongst the rest of the population, opinions vary from 'they destroy implicit trust that we know who we're talking to and thus destroy what little sense of community still exists' through all stations of the cross to 'they're harmless shut up old man you probably use your CB radio to get on the internet and anyway internet community doesn't exist amirite'.
There have also been discussions on terminology. Multiple, concurrent accounts, where clearly a joke (see recent example such as AstroZombies 2 through X, or much much older precedents like variations on zippitybop and the baby jesus) are generally considered fine. New accounts after retiring old usernames are also considered fine. Multiple concurrent accounts where the holder keeps the 'ownership' of the secondary accounts a secret are often considered corrosive, and that's where the argument lies.
localhuman's bad idea is a new wrinkle, but pretty clearly a not-very-well-thought-out one.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:16 PM on December 17, 2006
Read the Metatalk archives. There have been many heated discussions about the wearing of socks on hands.
Matt said a couple of days ago that he secretly (well, clearly not secretly) loathes them. Many agree. Amongst the rest of the population, opinions vary from 'they destroy implicit trust that we know who we're talking to and thus destroy what little sense of community still exists' through all stations of the cross to 'they're harmless shut up old man you probably use your CB radio to get on the internet and anyway internet community doesn't exist amirite'.
There have also been discussions on terminology. Multiple, concurrent accounts, where clearly a joke (see recent example such as AstroZombies 2 through X, or much much older precedents like variations on zippitybop and the baby jesus) are generally considered fine. New accounts after retiring old usernames are also considered fine. Multiple concurrent accounts where the holder keeps the 'ownership' of the secondary accounts a secret are often considered corrosive, and that's where the argument lies.
localhuman's bad idea is a new wrinkle, but pretty clearly a not-very-well-thought-out one.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:16 PM on December 17, 2006
email is in profile. Send address and a reasonably priced beer.
when you drink from this case of beer, you must post on metafilter. do you agree to do that?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:16 PM on December 17, 2006
when you drink from this case of beer, you must post on metafilter. do you agree to do that?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:16 PM on December 17, 2006
Yes, "tepid wonderland" is a very fine phrase indeed, thank you Jessamyn.
posted by Divine_Wino at 9:28 PM on December 17, 2006
posted by Divine_Wino at 9:28 PM on December 17, 2006
Yeah, like you'd ever be able to type 'clearlyinebriatedhuman' as a login when you're that wasted.
My advice to you: new user name, wait 2 years, and then make a sock puppet with as few letters as you can easily type with a heavily mittened left hand.
posted by maryh at 12:40 AM on December 18, 2006
My advice to you: new user name, wait 2 years, and then make a sock puppet with as few letters as you can easily type with a heavily mittened left hand.
posted by maryh at 12:40 AM on December 18, 2006
I don't want to get personal, jess, but John Mayer told me your body is a tepid wonderland.
*slaps self*
Posting while drunk/high was never my problem; it's posting while sleepless where I bite the big one.
posted by wendell at 5:14 AM on December 18, 2006
*slaps self*
Posting while drunk/high was never my problem; it's posting while sleepless where I bite the big one.
posted by wendell at 5:14 AM on December 18, 2006
If his sock puppet used the shift key, I might be for it.
posted by CunningLinguist at 5:31 AM on December 18, 2006
posted by CunningLinguist at 5:31 AM on December 18, 2006
WELL IF HE USED IT CONSTANTLY FOR NO REASON....
posted by nebulawindphone at 6:00 AM on December 18, 2006
posted by nebulawindphone at 6:00 AM on December 18, 2006
Yeah, like you'd ever be able to type 'clearlyinebriatedhuman' as a login when you're that wasted.
That's why you pre-emptively log it in once while sober, to get it in the autocomplete history of your browser.
posted by cortex at 6:15 AM on December 18, 2006
That's why you pre-emptively log it in once while sober, to get it in the autocomplete history of your browser.
posted by cortex at 6:15 AM on December 18, 2006
This thread was fantastic, if only because it gave us the line:
lessons learned: do not openly reveal one's malicious intentions.
posted by hugsnkisses at 7:45 AM on December 18, 2006
lessons learned: do not openly reveal one's malicious intentions.
posted by hugsnkisses at 7:45 AM on December 18, 2006
"Matt said a couple of days ago that he secretly (well, clearly not secretly) loathes them."
Assuming that the above statement is true, what is the problem? Since he is the owner of the site, he could just ban the practice altogether. If he's not willing to do that, then why should he whine about it?
posted by garypratt at 1:40 PM on December 18, 2006
Assuming that the above statement is true, what is the problem? Since he is the owner of the site, he could just ban the practice altogether. If he's not willing to do that, then why should he whine about it?
posted by garypratt at 1:40 PM on December 18, 2006
For the same reason that, if your boss offered you a bonus that you don't really deserve, you would still take it.
posted by dg at 2:26 PM on December 18, 2006
posted by dg at 2:26 PM on December 18, 2006
Assuming that the above statement is true
Try to keep up, will ya?
what is the problem?
Ask him. I've gone on about my own dislike for them several times before. You need links for those too, hell, find 'em yourself.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:38 PM on December 18, 2006
Try to keep up, will ya?
what is the problem?
Ask him. I've gone on about my own dislike for them several times before. You need links for those too, hell, find 'em yourself.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:38 PM on December 18, 2006
dg, yes I would take the raise, but I wouldn't complain about it (not a good analogy anyway, since I wouldn't totally control the situation like Matt does). Also, if Matt's going to do things just for the profit, fine, but he should be upfront about it, not bitch and eat his cake too.
stavrosthewonderchicken, I too have mentioned my dislike for this previously (and have seen your postings too). I'm sure if Matt cared about responding to this, he would have. But I'd love to hear his response (Matt?)
posted by garypratt at 9:00 PM on December 19, 2006
stavrosthewonderchicken, I too have mentioned my dislike for this previously (and have seen your postings too). I'm sure if Matt cared about responding to this, he would have. But I'd love to hear his response (Matt?)
posted by garypratt at 9:00 PM on December 19, 2006
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by ericb at 5:21 PM on December 17, 2006