Aren't these both hypotheticalfilter?

January 5, 2007 1:35 PM

Simply because I've always been disappointed we never got to discuss this question, I'm going to go ahead and ask whether the same ban reason should apply to this one.
posted by allkindsoftime to Etiquette/Policy at 1:35 PM (67 comments total)

The irony of the title on the latter jogged my memory.
posted by allkindsoftime at 1:36 PM on January 5, 2007

The latter question is really about the structural decay of buildings.

The previous question was really about....what exactly?
posted by vacapinta at 1:39 PM on January 5, 2007

I was curious, too, as to why the latter question has been allowed to stay around.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 1:45 PM on January 5, 2007 [1 favorite]

If it should have been deleted, it would be because it was a double.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:48 PM on January 5, 2007

That's all well and good, but what about this uncomfortable question?

It is somewhat similar in vein to this question, which was deleted.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:51 PM on January 5, 2007

Really? You can't see the difference between those two? I initially thought the latter was HypotheticalFilter also, but after reading the entire question concluded it was valid -just poorly phrased. The first link was just silly ChatFilter with arbitrary "rules" and complete with "who's your money on?"
posted by yeti at 1:55 PM on January 5, 2007

Having been rudely denied by administrative fate the opportunity to say as much previously, I relish now the chance finally to say, with full confidence, monkeys.
posted by cortex at 1:59 PM on January 5, 2007 [1 favorite]

The question depends on something that, on first read, sounds like something from a SciFi picture- the disapperance of the entire human race from earth (in a manner that doesn't destroy any of the buildings!). Questions far more realistic have been deleted for being "hypothetical".
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 2:00 PM on January 5, 2007 [1 favorite]

The answer to this person's question can be found in the blue. I am going off to find it!
posted by Mister_A at 2:03 PM on January 5, 2007

The un-deleted question seems certainly more . . . scientific. We have observable occasions of buildings left uninhabited and untended by humans. People can research the decay of certain substances, although they cannot predict things like catastrophic world-events.

For neither question can we have a definitive answer, but the high-rise building certainly can have better guesses.
posted by that girl at 2:03 PM on January 5, 2007

A question about euthanising one's own animal is allowable, methinks, because it's a hard thing that lots of people have to do all the time. A question about euthanising someone else's pet without their knowledge is not allowable, because killing someone else's pet is not only illegal but unethical.

If people don't want to deal with the uncomfortable aspects of being around animals, they don't have to. But it's not immoral or unethical to do so.
posted by koeselitz at 2:03 PM on January 5, 2007

I agree, koeselitz.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 2:04 PM on January 5, 2007 [1 favorite]

The "help me kill my dog" question was removed for related reasons. The two questions about buildings were different enough and the first oen got flagged a ton and the second one didn't even make my radar. By the time it did, the answers seemed sensible and the question didn't seem like some jokey game.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 2:05 PM on January 5, 2007

...but now it's been removed on suspicion of sockpuppetry. Hmm?
posted by koeselitz at 2:05 PM on January 5, 2007

Ah the post I sought was already linked to in the AskMe thread.

Anyway, for what it's worth - Da bears!
posted by Mister_A at 2:07 PM on January 5, 2007

Suspicion of sockpuppetry, or suspicion of trolling? Did posting a Q with a sockpuppet become an executable offense while I was on holiday?
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 2:09 PM on January 5, 2007 [1 favorite]

Did posting a Q with a sockpuppet become an executable offense while I was on holiday?

If we see you using a sock puppet to get around the posting limitation we will, at the very least, remove your question.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 2:12 PM on January 5, 2007

Ah, it appears the deletion reason changed: trolly question with possible sock puppet, take it to metatalk if you think this is in error. (unless it said that the whole time, in which case I'm just going crazy).
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 2:12 PM on January 5, 2007 [1 favorite]

cortex: you are a madman. Bear would totally fling monkey into the sun, you can't even talk about the bearonite ring bear gave monkey just in case bear went mad because, like, he'd just run up real fast to monkey when monkey wasn't suspecting it. Totally a ruse to put monkey at ease.
posted by boo_radley at 2:15 PM on January 5, 2007

My money's on the squirrels. Have you seen how they outsmart birdfeeders?
posted by yeti at 2:21 PM on January 5, 2007

Umm, the guy did point out his background, which lead to him asking the question. I vote non-troll, non-sockpuppet (unless mattamyn knows better), but very poorly phrased.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 2:29 PM on January 5, 2007

Goats. Tree climbing goats.
posted by Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese at 2:30 PM on January 5, 2007

the guy did point out his background, which lead to him asking the question.

Yes, after he clarified his initial question, I felt slightly less suspicious/squicked about it, but then I thought wait a minute: If he grew up on farms, why wouldn't he already know the best way to kill the dog? Makes me think it's a troll.

Anyhow, if it's legitimate, he got adequate replies to his question, deleted or not.
posted by veronica sawyer at 2:44 PM on January 5, 2007

Monkey has been hustling bear from day one. When they throw down, it'll be true colors so bright they'll burn your goddam eyes out of your skull, and for the rest of your days you'll see the burnt image of monkey looking at you, right through you.

Monkey does not fuck around.
posted by cortex at 2:46 PM on January 5, 2007 [1 favorite]

TPS - it may be unreasonable for the entire human race to disappear, but it's not necessarily unreasonable for the entire living contents of a city to die off or disappear, leaving the buildings intact. Someone in the thread mentioned the Anasazi cliff-dwellings. In the modern day, this could be caused by a fast epidemic (to prevent looting).
posted by muddgirl at 2:46 PM on January 5, 2007

Umm, the guy did point out his background, which lead to him asking the question. I vote non-troll, non-sockpuppet (unless mattamyn knows better), but very poorly phrased.

On that front, there's some corroborating evidence of a "tom trueluk" / "tomtrueluk" personality on the web. If it's a sock, it's an unusually well propped-up one. I think he was genuine.
posted by cortex at 2:47 PM on January 5, 2007

Monkey will send the vet to take care of bear.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 2:54 PM on January 5, 2007

Somebody might email _dead about this, as they appear to know each other.

Or maybe that's where the suspicion comes from.
posted by koeselitz at 3:03 PM on January 5, 2007

Bear cavalry.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 3:03 PM on January 5, 2007

this is why we can't have geist things.
posted by dong_resin at 3:09 PM on January 5, 2007

but very poorly phrased

Not everyone on here has English as their first language, you know.

wtf is a bangelboy, anyway?
posted by klue at 3:16 PM on January 5, 2007

First link is a non-starter based on a false premise and that should be the primary reason for its deletion: the truth of the matter is sharks and dolphins would both grow dry-land appendages and vie for supremacy of first the undersea and dry-land continents and then, ultimately, the far reaches of space.
posted by The God Complex at 3:17 PM on January 5, 2007

wtf is a bangelboy, anyway?

I dunno, but it's got an Egyptian gait.
posted by cortex at 3:25 PM on January 5, 2007

Monkey? Bear?

It depends on the monkey.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 3:43 PM on January 5, 2007

Yeah! Like my AskMe that got deleted when others of very similar ilk remained hypothetically smirking away right there on the page!

Not that I'm bitter or anything.
posted by jokeefe at 3:51 PM on January 5, 2007

I was curious, too, as to why the latter question has been allowed to stay around.

There seems to be this pervasive, but entirely unsupported belief that all hypothetical questions are disallowed on AskMe. This is not and has never been the case.

The FAQ disallows "open-ended, unanswerable hypothetical questions." "How long will buildings stand if humanity suddenly disappears" is neither open-ended nor unaswerable. Although it is hypothetical, we can reasonably speculate about what might happen.

"What animal species would become dominant if humanity disappeared?" would be an OK question, IMO. "Which animals, bears or monkeys, would become dominant if humanity disappeared? And they can't coexist, because, um, I said so. And it can't be any other type of animal because, um, I said so." is absurd.

On preview: the question jokeefe linked to should have been allowed to stay. Hypothetical, yes. Hypothetical chatfilter, no. And some of the links provided in the "when would buildings fall" question also address some of the issues jokeefe raised, so it is possible to have intelligent and informed speculation regarding them.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 4:11 PM on January 5, 2007 [1 favorite]

Bear has been training for this for a long, long time.
posted by felix betachat at 4:19 PM on January 5, 2007 [1 favorite]

jokeefe's question was answered anyways which is that there is no way to define "normal" for the Earth*. I agree it was a valid question but as jessamyn has said - phrasing is everything and jokeefe's question inevitable started producing discussion about the methods of the Evil Doctor: chatfilter.

*Thats not an argument in support of global warming - global warming will kill US and many other species. The Earth will survive just fine.
posted by vacapinta at 4:22 PM on January 5, 2007

I hope global warming heats things up enough that the dinosaurs come back from whatever tropical planetary vacation they've been on when global cooling forced them to fly south (in a galaxial sense).
posted by The God Complex at 4:32 PM on January 5, 2007

I think Joanna Newsom ought to get the first and last words on the Monkey and Bear saga, being their unofficial balladeer.
posted by hermitosis at 6:00 PM on January 5, 2007

Ys you say that, hermitosis?
posted by maudlin at 6:09 PM on January 5, 2007

You're all out of order.
posted by blue_beetle at 6:31 PM on January 5, 2007

Bear cavalry.
posted by monju_bosatsu

Imagine my chagrin when, on second glance, I realized that this said "Bear cavalry" instead of the "Bear cavity" that I had originally thought that I had read. The thought of bear cavities is way to much to bear.
posted by leftcoastbob at 6:39 PM on January 5, 2007

Grandpa won't wake up.
Please advise.
posted by Dizzy at 7:05 PM on January 5, 2007

I say monkeys. And it's mainly because I think "everybody's got something to hide 'cept for me and my bear" just doesn't make it. Not to mention "bear around", or even "hey hey we're the bears!" The Marx Brothers' "Bear Business"? I don't think so. "I got a bear on my back" doesn't have such a terrible ring to it, though. That could work. But anyway, I'm still going with monkeys.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 8:31 PM on January 5, 2007

Monkey. Hiding in the trees throwing rocks at the bears. Definitely monkey.
posted by grapefruitmoon at 8:33 PM on January 5, 2007

I'd like to take this moment to both say that we have the best fucking moderators in the world (rye whiskey is the best fucking dring in the world) and that inconsistent moderation is a feature, and not a bug. I believe, heartily, in the wisdom of arguing case by case, rather than from principle or precedent. I think that the inconsistencies live in the edges of the moderation, rather than in the core, and that this is a rational response to a rational system with irrational edges. That sometimes borderline questions get deleted and sometimes they don't should elicit an institutional memory that allows some of the outliers, but with a lower sucess rate than "gimme" questions.
While each instance can and probably should be argued over, Jessahowie is offering the best possible solution through an applied philosophy of risk.
Someday, I hope to go to grad school on the idea of endorsing inconsistent moderation. Until then, man, rye is great.
posted by klangklangston at 8:53 PM on January 5, 2007 [1 favorite]

My money's on the squirrels. Have you seen how they outsmart birdfeeders?

I recall reading an essay--by John Gardner, I believe--where the writer mused upon from where the next intelligent species would evolve, should we, the human race, destroy ourselves in atomic war. It ended with him watching from a hospital window as a squirrel repeatedly attacked a squirrel proof bird feeder until it had flipped itself over the plate on the chain and made it to the seeds. It then looked him in the eye and, with a chill, he realized that moment who our inheritors would be.

I would have to agree. They have the makings of hands and are simply relentless.
posted by y2karl at 9:00 PM on January 5, 2007

Good points, klang, well said. But rye? Man single malts are where it's at. Then again, you get to heavy into 'em and you may not be able to afford that grad school tuition.

More importantly, where do you come down on the monkey/bear question?
posted by flapjax at midnite at 9:11 PM on January 5, 2007

Rye is best because single malt is a waste after two of 'em. Ryw is not. As I am living proof!

Monkeys and bears would largely co-exist, as they inhabit different biomes, until the monkeys evolved again and killed bears to make room for strip malls.
posted by klangklangston at 9:23 PM on January 5, 2007

(PS: Made Korean pancakes [still have not learned proper word] tonight, and they were good, though needing some tweeking. I didn't know that the recipe would make so goddamned many though, so any MeFites in the Ann Arbor area who want 'em can come by and take 'em. Probably about 20 pancakes from the two eggs/two cups flour recipe, because they have to e thin like crepes...)
posted by klangklangston at 9:27 PM on January 5, 2007

[NOT RACIST]
posted by klangklangston at 9:27 PM on January 5, 2007

I miss rye.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:15 PM on January 5, 2007

Which animal is the one animal on earth besides humans that forms groups which wage wars against each other? Hint: not bears.
posted by koeselitz at 10:20 PM on January 5, 2007

still have not learned proper word

전 jeon (vowel sounds like 'u' in 'sun') or 지짐 jijim (both 'i' sounds are 'ee') are both correct names for it.

파전 pajeon is the most common kind; 파 'pa' means spring onion.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:21 PM on January 5, 2007

지짐 jijim

So, it's the 'jijim' name that Japanese have adopted, transforming it (in Romaji spelling, that is) to 'chijimi'.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 10:24 PM on January 5, 2007

Can't get rye over in K-land, stav?
posted by flapjax at midnite at 10:25 PM on January 5, 2007

Reckon so, although it's possible that both derive from the Chinese characters -- my hanja sucks, so I don't know.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:26 PM on January 5, 2007

Can't get rye over in K-land, stav?

Not in the boonies, where I live, sadly, no. I've gone off the hard stuff in my old age, anyway, but one gets the occasional craving.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:27 PM on January 5, 2007

Also, "more fun than a barrel of bears" just doesn't have it.



Now, a barrel full of roosters . . .
posted by Kirth Gerson at 4:19 AM on January 6, 2007

My monkey's on the bear.

Wait, I mean...the bear has my money.

Uh...I got it: the bare monkey!

Nevermind. Fuck chatfilter.
posted by mullacc at 5:53 AM on January 6, 2007

Sometimes you fuck the bear, sometimes the bear fucks you.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 6:01 AM on January 6, 2007

Hey stav, is that a soft j or a hard j in Korean?

And why do they make alcohol so dehydrating?
posted by klangklangston at 7:07 AM on January 6, 2007

[NOT BEARIST]
posted by Kwine at 10:15 AM on January 6, 2007

klangklangston: "And why do they make alcohol so dehydrating?"

So that you have a reason to drink even more of it now.
posted by koeselitz at 12:52 PM on January 6, 2007

Sounds like 'g' in 'gee', like 'gee, you're pretty without your glasses, Miss Smith,' klang.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:28 PM on January 6, 2007

Definitely squirrels.
posted by deborah at 9:29 PM on January 6, 2007