No-favorite-bands policy January 14, 2002 5:50 AM Subscribe
"I like this band. What band do you like?" Oy... Should there maybe be a specific no-favorite-bands admonishment in the link guidelines?
I like MetaFilter. I dislike Spoon's self-indulgent, self-referential posts.
posted by Carol Anne at 6:05 AM on January 14, 2002
posted by Carol Anne at 6:05 AM on January 14, 2002
who volunteers to explain the whole 'metafilter' thing to Spoon?
posted by kv at 6:17 AM on January 14, 2002
posted by kv at 6:17 AM on January 14, 2002
If Spoon hasn't gotten it by now, I don't think he ever will. A look at his past posts reveals not only a poor appreciation of MeFi form and function, but an unhealthy ardor for producing one not-so-great FPP every day.
posted by dogmatic at 6:28 AM on January 14, 2002
posted by dogmatic at 6:28 AM on January 14, 2002
Maybe we could have something to strip line breaks from FPPs (or rather, not put them in in the first place)?
posted by transient at 6:29 AM on January 14, 2002
posted by transient at 6:29 AM on January 14, 2002
Which is worse; an "inappropriate post" or someone complaining about how "inappropriate" it is (according to them).
Give me a break. Don't like the post? Don't read it and don't comment on it. Let me make my own conclusions on how appropriate I think someone's link is. I don't need your help.
posted by FreezBoy at 6:37 AM on January 14, 2002
Give me a break. Don't like the post? Don't read it and don't comment on it. Let me make my own conclusions on how appropriate I think someone's link is. I don't need your help.
posted by FreezBoy at 6:37 AM on January 14, 2002
Could've been a good discussion, had the thread not been corrupted by complainers and tattle tails.
posted by dcgartn at 6:43 AM on January 14, 2002
posted by dcgartn at 6:43 AM on January 14, 2002
I don't have much problem with the post, except the carriage returns. Although there are other places you can talk about music/bands specifically, here (SELFLINK SELFLINK SELFLINK) and here.
posted by corpse at 6:45 AM on January 14, 2002
posted by corpse at 6:45 AM on January 14, 2002
FreezBoy, DcGartn, and other relatively new members: The reason for the large number of complaints is because MetaFilter isn't a discussion board, and the host of the site has tried numerous times to discourage members from turning it into one.
The guidelines discourage posts started solely for the purpose of starting discussion: "If you're posting a generalized question to the audience, or posting a comment as a main thread, either find an appropriate mailing list, or use MetaTalk."
posted by rcade at 6:51 AM on January 14, 2002
The guidelines discourage posts started solely for the purpose of starting discussion: "If you're posting a generalized question to the audience, or posting a comment as a main thread, either find an appropriate mailing list, or use MetaTalk."
posted by rcade at 6:51 AM on January 14, 2002
No one user gets to decide whether or not a post is inappropriate; that's for the community to decide. However, a quick survey of the community's feelings on poll-type questions reveals that it doesn't like them all that much.
posted by dogmatic at 6:59 AM on January 14, 2002
posted by dogmatic at 6:59 AM on January 14, 2002
Give me a break. Don't like the post? Don't read it and don't comment on it. Let me make my own conclusions on how appropriate I think someone's link is. I don't need your help.
*whips out self policing badge*
Ah, but we do have guidelines here. I will quote them below and reference the post in question.
From "What makes a bad post . . .?"
Self-linking also appropriates the use of MetaFilter as your guestbook. If you just wrote a thought provoking piece and want to get feedback on it, try using ArsDigita's Loquacious system or BlogVoices to add community interaction to your own site.
While this kind of post isn't self linking in the strictest sense (since you aren't linking to yourself, obviously), it is similar. Writing a long description of your opinion on some topic and then asking what everyone else thinks does appropriate MeFi as your guestbook.
Make sure you're linking to something on the web. If you're posting a generalized question to the audience, or posting a comment as a main thread, either find an appropriate mailing list, or use MetaTalk.
This, I think, speaks for itself. That being said, you can get the same sort of discussion [as you would by asking a generalized question] by posting carefully. The art is in the post.
From "What makes a good post . . . ?"
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.
So the discussion should center in some part around the content of the linked page, rather than the linked page being the [unread] first link in a growing pile of links.
posted by iceberg273 at 7:01 AM on January 14, 2002
*whips out self policing badge*
Ah, but we do have guidelines here. I will quote them below and reference the post in question.
From "What makes a bad post . . .?"
Self-linking also appropriates the use of MetaFilter as your guestbook. If you just wrote a thought provoking piece and want to get feedback on it, try using ArsDigita's Loquacious system or BlogVoices to add community interaction to your own site.
While this kind of post isn't self linking in the strictest sense (since you aren't linking to yourself, obviously), it is similar. Writing a long description of your opinion on some topic and then asking what everyone else thinks does appropriate MeFi as your guestbook.
Make sure you're linking to something on the web. If you're posting a generalized question to the audience, or posting a comment as a main thread, either find an appropriate mailing list, or use MetaTalk.
This, I think, speaks for itself. That being said, you can get the same sort of discussion [as you would by asking a generalized question] by posting carefully. The art is in the post.
From "What makes a good post . . . ?"
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.
So the discussion should center in some part around the content of the linked page, rather than the linked page being the [unread] first link in a growing pile of links.
posted by iceberg273 at 7:01 AM on January 14, 2002
I have mailed Mr. Howie and asked him to delete my post.
Here are (some) of my reasons.
1./ It seems that i have offended (yet again) some me-fi readers who have lost their "off" switch.
2./Some of the "i've lost my off switch" me-fi posters seem to see themselves as the matthowie police and continue to pedal pointless pedantry, criticise other people's posts and are always making sure that everyone is adhering to their perceived version of "the rules"
3./My latest post is not self indulgent or self referential, nor is it a repeat post of "my favourite band" It is, exactly as it says in the text of the post.
4./My aim in posting this link was to draw reader's attention to bands and music that they may not ever have heard of. I was straight onto the stan ridgeway site and downloading mp3's. This was the point. (thanks rocketpup)
5./Carriage returns add clarity.
6./If you consider a FPP to be substandard then that is your opinion. Opinions, as we all know, are like buttocks. Everyone has them, but they are not always best aired in public.
Please continue your tirade of humourless commentry.
Thanks
posted by Spoon at 7:10 AM on January 14, 2002
Here are (some) of my reasons.
1./ It seems that i have offended (yet again) some me-fi readers who have lost their "off" switch.
2./Some of the "i've lost my off switch" me-fi posters seem to see themselves as the matthowie police and continue to pedal pointless pedantry, criticise other people's posts and are always making sure that everyone is adhering to their perceived version of "the rules"
3./My latest post is not self indulgent or self referential, nor is it a repeat post of "my favourite band" It is, exactly as it says in the text of the post.
4./My aim in posting this link was to draw reader's attention to bands and music that they may not ever have heard of. I was straight onto the stan ridgeway site and downloading mp3's. This was the point. (thanks rocketpup)
5./Carriage returns add clarity.
6./If you consider a FPP to be substandard then that is your opinion. Opinions, as we all know, are like buttocks. Everyone has them, but they are not always best aired in public.
Please continue your tirade of humourless commentry.
Thanks
posted by Spoon at 7:10 AM on January 14, 2002
My aim in posting this link was to draw reader's attention to bands and music that they may not ever have heard of. I was straight onto the stan ridgeway site and downloading mp3's. This was the point.
If that was your point, then the thread did not belong on MeFi. Read over the guidelines again, please. This is not a mailing list.
posted by dogmatic at 7:20 AM on January 14, 2002
If that was your point, then the thread did not belong on MeFi. Read over the guidelines again, please. This is not a mailing list.
posted by dogmatic at 7:20 AM on January 14, 2002
Spoon, I'm not attacking or jumping on a policy bandwagon; I'm just curious. If it was meaningful enough for you to post an extensive list of justifications, WHY did you email mathowie askiing him to delete your FPpost? Isn't that really a lot like saying: yes I was wrong, but not really?
posted by Wulfgar! at 7:27 AM on January 14, 2002
posted by Wulfgar! at 7:27 AM on January 14, 2002
Opinions, as we all know, are like buttocks.
I did not know this.
posted by iceberg273 at 7:27 AM on January 14, 2002
I did not know this.
posted by iceberg273 at 7:27 AM on January 14, 2002
Maybe we could have something to strip line breaks from FPPs (or rather, not put them in in the first place)?
Excellent suggestion. More than anything else, this would encourage people to write succinct (and therefore better) FPPS.
5./Carriage returns add clarity.
In a long piece, yes. In FPPS, no. A lot of readers skim the front page, and the subliminal marker of the end of one FPP and the start of the next is a double line break. FPPs with multiple carriage returns undermine this.
posted by rory at 7:30 AM on January 14, 2002
Excellent suggestion. More than anything else, this would encourage people to write succinct (and therefore better) FPPS.
5./Carriage returns add clarity.
In a long piece, yes. In FPPS, no. A lot of readers skim the front page, and the subliminal marker of the end of one FPP and the start of the next is a double line break. FPPs with multiple carriage returns undermine this.
posted by rory at 7:30 AM on January 14, 2002
Absolutely, strip line and paragraph breaks from FPPs! Axiom: If you can't make your FPP within a single paragraph, you probably shouldn't make the post. Revise it until it fits within a single paragraph. If you can't, it's probably not right for MetaFilter. If the point of an FPP is to link to interesting content this should not be a problem.
posted by mcwetboy at 7:35 AM on January 14, 2002
posted by mcwetboy at 7:35 AM on January 14, 2002
Some of the most valuable MeFi FPPs have been polling posts. In fact some of them have been linked to in the "best of" column along the right side.. for example I remember the FPP about favorite online radio sites that was a treasure trove of archane knowledge. This is why I like MeFi to read the communities contributions on a subject.
posted by stbalbach at 7:39 AM on January 14, 2002
posted by stbalbach at 7:39 AM on January 14, 2002
Opinions, as we all know, are like buttocks. Everyone has them, but they are not always best aired in public. — Spoon
How can you be this hurtful, this cruel — don't you know I lost my buttocks in the September 11th attacks? You insensitive bastard...
posted by nicwolff at 7:45 AM on January 14, 2002
How can you be this hurtful, this cruel — don't you know I lost my buttocks in the September 11th attacks? You insensitive bastard...
posted by nicwolff at 7:45 AM on January 14, 2002
Gee rcade, iceberg273, and etc. thanks for posting the guidelines. As a "relatively new member" who's been reading the site for over a year and a member since August, I've never taken the time to read them.
My problem is not with the guidelines but with the people who constantly point out that there are guidelines.
Quoting guidelines is not going to stop a member from ocassionally posting a bad post. Everyone has a lapse in judgement, has their own idea of what is important, cool, interesting.
Why do some people find marginally appropriate links so personally offensive?
It's only a website folks. Hopefully it's not your entire life.
posted by FreezBoy at 7:55 AM on January 14, 2002
My problem is not with the guidelines but with the people who constantly point out that there are guidelines.
Quoting guidelines is not going to stop a member from ocassionally posting a bad post. Everyone has a lapse in judgement, has their own idea of what is important, cool, interesting.
Why do some people find marginally appropriate links so personally offensive?
It's only a website folks. Hopefully it's not your entire life.
posted by FreezBoy at 7:55 AM on January 14, 2002
I almost* posted this to the front page once, in one of my late night moments of incoherency/inanity: Ninja
*almost meaning I entertained the thought.
posted by insomnyuk at 8:02 AM on January 14, 2002
*almost meaning I entertained the thought.
posted by insomnyuk at 8:02 AM on January 14, 2002
FreezBoy,
What's the point of having guidelines if there's no attempt at enforcing them? There'll always be some give-and-take between inconsiderate, inappropriate posting and overzealous policing, but the aim is to find some sort of equilibrium and keep MeFi from devolving like so many similar forums. If no one took it upon themselves to do this, this board would indeed go to shit and the rest of us would lose something valuable. I'm willing to put up with a little criticism and self-policing in order to have MeFi as a resource.
Spoon, I personally didn't have much of a problem with the content of the post - although I understand others' complaints - but as soon as I saw the formatting, I knew you were going to get a so-called tongue-lashing (which really never sounded that bad to me). On the front page, brevity is probably even more important than clarity (although some interplay between the two is expected).
posted by Sinner at 8:06 AM on January 14, 2002
What's the point of having guidelines if there's no attempt at enforcing them? There'll always be some give-and-take between inconsiderate, inappropriate posting and overzealous policing, but the aim is to find some sort of equilibrium and keep MeFi from devolving like so many similar forums. If no one took it upon themselves to do this, this board would indeed go to shit and the rest of us would lose something valuable. I'm willing to put up with a little criticism and self-policing in order to have MeFi as a resource.
Spoon, I personally didn't have much of a problem with the content of the post - although I understand others' complaints - but as soon as I saw the formatting, I knew you were going to get a so-called tongue-lashing (which really never sounded that bad to me). On the front page, brevity is probably even more important than clarity (although some interplay between the two is expected).
posted by Sinner at 8:06 AM on January 14, 2002
I accuse Spoon of using too many carriage returns for what inevitably will be a banal discussion.
machaus
I like MetaFilter. I dislike Spoon's self-indulgent, self referential posts.
Carol Anne
who volunteers to explain the whole 'metafilter' thing to Spoon?
kv
If Spoon hasn't gotten it by now, I don't think he ever will. A look at his past posts reveals not only a poor appreciation of MeFi form and function, but an unhealthy ardor for producing one not-so-great FPP every day.
dogmatic
I'd call this small selection over zealous policing.
>Spoon: best not to use carriage returns in a fpp - and polling posts are generally frowned on.
That would have done the trick.
Do you see?
posted by Spoon at 8:13 AM on January 14, 2002
machaus
I like MetaFilter. I dislike Spoon's self-indulgent, self referential posts.
Carol Anne
who volunteers to explain the whole 'metafilter' thing to Spoon?
kv
If Spoon hasn't gotten it by now, I don't think he ever will. A look at his past posts reveals not only a poor appreciation of MeFi form and function, but an unhealthy ardor for producing one not-so-great FPP every day.
dogmatic
I'd call this small selection over zealous policing.
>Spoon: best not to use carriage returns in a fpp - and polling posts are generally frowned on.
That would have done the trick.
Do you see?
posted by Spoon at 8:13 AM on January 14, 2002
Don't like the post? Don't read it and don't comment on it.
FreezBoy, might you take some of your own advice instead of coming to MeTa & complaining about what goes on here?
posted by zempf at 8:15 AM on January 14, 2002
FreezBoy, might you take some of your own advice instead of coming to MeTa & complaining about what goes on here?
posted by zempf at 8:15 AM on January 14, 2002
Here's what Matt had to say about the previous thread about the mediocre/bad bands.
I personally don't mind such threads once in a while, then again I like talking about F1 too, but I wouldn't want to see a new F1 FPP every race weekend.
posted by riffola at 8:15 AM on January 14, 2002
I personally don't mind such threads once in a while, then again I like talking about F1 too, but I wouldn't want to see a new F1 FPP every race weekend.
posted by riffola at 8:15 AM on January 14, 2002
Upon preview, this doesn't necessarily apply to Spoon, but to those who don't "get" the self-policing thing.
It's very simple. When posting to the front page, check your ego at the door.
If one person bitches about your post, they may well just be an asshole. If 12 people bitch about your post, you've probably done something wrong [see mutilate, fold and]. Being defensive doesn't help--and if you walk away dismissing all 12 of the dissenters as assholes, you'll probably run into the same problem when posting in the future.
posted by jpoulos at 8:17 AM on January 14, 2002
It's very simple. When posting to the front page, check your ego at the door.
If one person bitches about your post, they may well just be an asshole. If 12 people bitch about your post, you've probably done something wrong [see mutilate, fold and]. Being defensive doesn't help--and if you walk away dismissing all 12 of the dissenters as assholes, you'll probably run into the same problem when posting in the future.
posted by jpoulos at 8:17 AM on January 14, 2002
Upon seeing Spoon's last comment, maybe it does apply to him. :-)
posted by jpoulos at 8:19 AM on January 14, 2002
posted by jpoulos at 8:19 AM on January 14, 2002
metafilter taliban. that was a good 'un! buncha zorks anyway. i accuse dogmatic of wearing his monocle crooked and having a weak battery in his FPP taser.
posted by quonsar at 8:22 AM on January 14, 2002
posted by quonsar at 8:22 AM on January 14, 2002
That would have done the trick.
Do you see?
Do you? It appears not.
posted by Skot at 8:23 AM on January 14, 2002
Do you see?
Do you? It appears not.
posted by Skot at 8:23 AM on January 14, 2002
I say again - until Matt appoints an official mefi gestapo the un-official one will exercise it's imagined authority.
Congratulations on mucking up a thread which alot of people would have enjoyed otherwise. You could have simply brought your gripe to metatalk instead of cluttering up the FPP and then we would have seen if it was one that brought about interesting comments or not.
posted by revbrian at 8:34 AM on January 14, 2002
Congratulations on mucking up a thread which alot of people would have enjoyed otherwise. You could have simply brought your gripe to metatalk instead of cluttering up the FPP and then we would have seen if it was one that brought about interesting comments or not.
posted by revbrian at 8:34 AM on January 14, 2002
I rather think the self-policing of mefi is one of it's more endearing properties, and the fact it is so effective proves what a truly great site mefi is. if that makes you angry, then simply don't make bad posts.
but imagine if the kind of post Spoon made was considered ok and maybe 4 or 5 like it were posted a day. thats a lot of nonesense to have to wade through to get to the things that I think most people come to here for: important and/or interesting news that has slipped under mainstream radar, injustices we were unaware of, useful web tools, problematic world leaders, etc. I personally don't want to see mefi turned into a glorified chat room. therefore, I would ask all crazy diamonds to continue shining on.
posted by mcsweetie at 9:00 AM on January 14, 2002
but imagine if the kind of post Spoon made was considered ok and maybe 4 or 5 like it were posted a day. thats a lot of nonesense to have to wade through to get to the things that I think most people come to here for: important and/or interesting news that has slipped under mainstream radar, injustices we were unaware of, useful web tools, problematic world leaders, etc. I personally don't want to see mefi turned into a glorified chat room. therefore, I would ask all crazy diamonds to continue shining on.
posted by mcsweetie at 9:00 AM on January 14, 2002
The complaint was brought to MetaTalk, revbrian. I suspect that's why out of 30 comments, only a handful of them reference the fact that Spoon's front-page post sucks big rocks.
posted by rcade at 9:01 AM on January 14, 2002
posted by rcade at 9:01 AM on January 14, 2002
Tangentially, are there any decent community sites out there which encourage discussion of "favourite band" type subjects? Not that I want to use them (I still like it here), but some people might be really grateful for a place where they can have those types of discussion and half the other members don't turn round and say "you can't talk about that here" ...
posted by walrus at 9:06 AM on January 14, 2002
posted by walrus at 9:06 AM on January 14, 2002
there is also the board at pitchfork, which is quite larger, but has a worse signal to noise ratio.
posted by corpse at 9:21 AM on January 14, 2002
posted by corpse at 9:21 AM on January 14, 2002
important and/or interesting news that has slipped under mainstream radar, injustices we were unaware of, useful web tools, problematic world leaders, etc
You might be surprised if you click on the 'two years ago' link on the front page—about how very little there was of 2) and 4), and how much more there was of 1) and 3). There weren't nearly as many political posts here until 'Nader Nader Nader' started up—that opened the floodgates. Every so often we get MeTa threads about how there should be less political content on MeFi, not more. (AKA the 'if you want indymedia you know where to find it' debate.) Which, I suppose, is the real core of the link-vs-discussion debate, being covered in another Thread Near You. (and I see rich and kv in that thread have made some of these same points.)
posted by darukaru at 9:25 AM on January 14, 2002
You might be surprised if you click on the 'two years ago' link on the front page—about how very little there was of 2) and 4), and how much more there was of 1) and 3). There weren't nearly as many political posts here until 'Nader Nader Nader' started up—that opened the floodgates. Every so often we get MeTa threads about how there should be less political content on MeFi, not more. (AKA the 'if you want indymedia you know where to find it' debate.) Which, I suppose, is the real core of the link-vs-discussion debate, being covered in another Thread Near You. (and I see rich and kv in that thread have made some of these same points.)
posted by darukaru at 9:25 AM on January 14, 2002
There are a few problems here. Last week we had the favorite band thread and a worst band thread, so having yet another band thread a few days later was blowing the whole moderation thing out. I'm not going to make a rule saying all "polling the audience" posts are bad, though many of them are, but if there's maybe one every few weeks, they're not too bad. There have been three in a short period of time, and it's too many.
The vertical whitespace thing really pisses me off personally. I'm not going to ban the use of p tags or line break tags, because in moderation (once in a blue moon), they are appropriate to a post.
But the post...
was a mediocre one...
and took up the vertical space...
of three typical posts...
on metafilter.
Spoon, if you think you're getting an unfair amount of criticism here, I think many people were put off by not only something they deemed weak, but it was hogging up the whole page.
Once discussion gets rolling on a "bad" thread, I usually prefer if people bow out of criticizing it, just to try and salvage something useful out of it, or let people get it out of their system. It's ok if there's a pointer to metatalk to discuss it, but I don't like that people derailed it a bit by calling "suck." I'm aware that without the criticism, people think "what's your favorite ___" are suddenly good posts and we need to poll everyone to death on every possible like and dislike because dammit, I have to know everything about everyone!, but then again, as long as the poster knows they shouldn't keep posting that kind of material, I don't think it'll happen again.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:29 AM on January 14, 2002
The vertical whitespace thing really pisses me off personally. I'm not going to ban the use of p tags or line break tags, because in moderation (once in a blue moon), they are appropriate to a post.
But the post...
was a mediocre one...
and took up the vertical space...
of three typical posts...
on metafilter.
Spoon, if you think you're getting an unfair amount of criticism here, I think many people were put off by not only something they deemed weak, but it was hogging up the whole page.
Once discussion gets rolling on a "bad" thread, I usually prefer if people bow out of criticizing it, just to try and salvage something useful out of it, or let people get it out of their system. It's ok if there's a pointer to metatalk to discuss it, but I don't like that people derailed it a bit by calling "suck." I'm aware that without the criticism, people think "what's your favorite ___" are suddenly good posts and we need to poll everyone to death on every possible like and dislike because dammit, I have to know everything about everyone!, but then again, as long as the poster knows they shouldn't keep posting that kind of material, I don't think it'll happen again.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:29 AM on January 14, 2002
However small and insignificant it currently is, I think the transition to "message board" has begun and more people are confused about the rules (however prominant they may be). Were I in charge, I'd start deleting threads regardless of the comment count.
posted by tomorama at 12:18 PM on January 14, 2002
posted by tomorama at 12:18 PM on January 14, 2002
if I were in charge, every post would be about milkshakes, herbal tea, and new radiohead albums.
posted by mcsweetie at 12:26 PM on January 14, 2002
posted by mcsweetie at 12:26 PM on January 14, 2002
Let's see:
1. A web application that allows users to post links with a writeup that itself links to a discussion area, but it's NOT a MESSAGE BOARD.
2. Users declaring line breaks waste space when in fact that space is virtual and nonexistant.
You people may want to remove the butt plugs once a week cuz your eyeballs are turning brown.
posted by mischief at 12:49 PM on January 14, 2002
1. A web application that allows users to post links with a writeup that itself links to a discussion area, but it's NOT a MESSAGE BOARD.
2. Users declaring line breaks waste space when in fact that space is virtual and nonexistant.
You people may want to remove the butt plugs once a week cuz your eyeballs are turning brown.
posted by mischief at 12:49 PM on January 14, 2002
"You people may want to remove the butt plugs once a week cuz your eyeballs are turning brown."
now THAT's a new metafilter tagline if i've ever seen one :-)
posted by quonsar at 12:54 PM on January 14, 2002
now THAT's a new metafilter tagline if i've ever seen one :-)
posted by quonsar at 12:54 PM on January 14, 2002
A web application that allows users to post links with a writeup that itself links to a discussion area, but it's NOT a MESSAGE BOARD.
Are you being a troll here, mischief, or are you really as dense as this comment implies? Lots of sites manage to link to a discussion area without being discussion boards. Slate, nytimes.com, the Fray, yadda yadda yadda.
posted by rcade at 1:10 PM on January 14, 2002
Are you being a troll here, mischief, or are you really as dense as this comment implies? Lots of sites manage to link to a discussion area without being discussion boards. Slate, nytimes.com, the Fray, yadda yadda yadda.
posted by rcade at 1:10 PM on January 14, 2002
2. Users declaring line breaks waste space when in fact that space is virtual and nonexistant.
Are you saying because the site shows up in a browser instead of a printed page, it's pointless to argue about space issues? There is a very real problem with scrolling on websites, typically 20-30 things show up on the front page each day, and it's usually best when visitors can see them all in 2 or 3 screens.
If...
Every...
Post...
Took...
Up...
This...
Much...
Room...
Don't....
You...
Think...
It...
Would...
Become...
A...
Problem?
The site is a community of thousands, so every action by a single member has repercussions of thousands of members. When one member chooses to make their post unnecessarily dramatic and takes up the space of three posts, others have every right to protest. There are real usability issues involved with page length. I would hate to see everyone on the site competing for everyone's attention with huge fonts, lots of whitespace, or the dreaded ebay L@@K HERE type of wording.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 1:10 PM on January 14, 2002
Are you saying because the site shows up in a browser instead of a printed page, it's pointless to argue about space issues? There is a very real problem with scrolling on websites, typically 20-30 things show up on the front page each day, and it's usually best when visitors can see them all in 2 or 3 screens.
If...
Every...
Post...
Took...
Up...
This...
Much...
Room...
Don't....
You...
Think...
It...
Would...
Become...
A...
Problem?
The site is a community of thousands, so every action by a single member has repercussions of thousands of members. When one member chooses to make their post unnecessarily dramatic and takes up the space of three posts, others have every right to protest. There are real usability issues involved with page length. I would hate to see everyone on the site competing for everyone's attention with huge fonts, lots of whitespace, or the dreaded ebay L@@K HERE type of wording.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 1:10 PM on January 14, 2002
Lots of sites manage to link to a discussion area without being discussion boards
Do they bill themselves as a "community blog" or "the Plastic.com it's alright to like"? No, they do not, but Metafilter does and that sure sounds like a message board to me. Sending a mixed message is an excellent way of ensuring that users will interpret the rules to match their way of doing things.
As for line breaks, Matt, if you make a tool available, people are going to use that tool. Some people communicate with a bit of flamboyance, are you going to ban their communication style simply because it does not conform with your own? Granted, BBS and usenet veterans tend to conserve bits because back then, with slow modems and low resolution monitors, line breaks were costly. That is no longer the case, and with new users coming in who did not live through that period but are coming from English composition classes that encourage paragraphing, adding whitespace is their style.
Being reactionary is not going to change the younger generation, but it will steel them to rebel against established community norms. You can either tolerate their behavior, bang your head against the wall trying to change them, or you can ban them by closing the community to all new members permanently. This is another example of the inevitable merging of the real world and cyberspace.
posted by mischief at 1:43 PM on January 14, 2002
Do they bill themselves as a "community blog" or "the Plastic.com it's alright to like"? No, they do not, but Metafilter does and that sure sounds like a message board to me. Sending a mixed message is an excellent way of ensuring that users will interpret the rules to match their way of doing things.
As for line breaks, Matt, if you make a tool available, people are going to use that tool. Some people communicate with a bit of flamboyance, are you going to ban their communication style simply because it does not conform with your own? Granted, BBS and usenet veterans tend to conserve bits because back then, with slow modems and low resolution monitors, line breaks were costly. That is no longer the case, and with new users coming in who did not live through that period but are coming from English composition classes that encourage paragraphing, adding whitespace is their style.
Being reactionary is not going to change the younger generation, but it will steel them to rebel against established community norms. You can either tolerate their behavior, bang your head against the wall trying to change them, or you can ban them by closing the community to all new members permanently. This is another example of the inevitable merging of the real world and cyberspace.
posted by mischief at 1:43 PM on January 14, 2002
mischief is living up to the name. Or is it mis-chief? Don't forget, you ain't the man, matthowie is.
posted by ashbury at 2:06 PM on January 14, 2002
posted by ashbury at 2:06 PM on January 14, 2002
I don't make the shots, I just call them as I see them. ;-P
posted by mischief at 2:08 PM on January 14, 2002
posted by mischief at 2:08 PM on January 14, 2002
mischief I don't think it's about conserving bits ... it's about aesthetics. Scrolling is awfully user-intensive.
posted by walrus at 2:09 PM on January 14, 2002
posted by walrus at 2:09 PM on January 14, 2002
1. A web application that allows users to post links with a writeup that itself links to a discussion area, but it's NOT a MESSAGE BOARD
Nope. MetaFilter is a weblog, first and foremost. A weblog is not a message board. Spend more time reading and less time trolling, smart guy.
posted by tomorama at 2:10 PM on January 14, 2002
Nope. MetaFilter is a weblog, first and foremost. A weblog is not a message board. Spend more time reading and less time trolling, smart guy.
posted by tomorama at 2:10 PM on January 14, 2002
As for line breaks, Matt, if you make a tool available, people are going to use that tool. Some people communicate with a bit of flamboyance, are you going to ban their communication style simply because it does not conform with your own? ...
The availability of a tool does not imply the freedom to abuse. Common sense is a requirement.
Re: Line Breaks
Just because you can doesn't mean you should. It has nothing to do with leftover traditions, it has to do with legibility. You have the freedom to believe people are incorrect and lots of line breaks are ok for whatever reasons you stated. I guess you enjoy being wrong. Aesthetics, design principals, legibility, usability, this all goes back to that whole reading thing...
posted by tomorama at 2:16 PM on January 14, 2002
The availability of a tool does not imply the freedom to abuse. Common sense is a requirement.
Re: Line Breaks
Just because you can doesn't mean you should. It has nothing to do with leftover traditions, it has to do with legibility. You have the freedom to believe people are incorrect and lots of line breaks are ok for whatever reasons you stated. I guess you enjoy being wrong. Aesthetics, design principals, legibility, usability, this all goes back to that whole reading thing...
posted by tomorama at 2:16 PM on January 14, 2002
"MetaFilter is a weblog" in name and by arbitrary definition (albeit that of the owner) only, while in reality it is a website that allows users to post messages.
I can call a hammer a saw, but its operation is still that of a hammer.
posted by mischief at 2:18 PM on January 14, 2002
I can call a hammer a saw, but its operation is still that of a hammer.
posted by mischief at 2:18 PM on January 14, 2002
"Common sense is a requirement. [I]t has to do with legibility."
For most people, common sense dictates the use of ample whitespace since whitespace makes things easier to read, thus, more legible. Again, you are simply at war with the newbies' definitions.
posted by mischief at 2:22 PM on January 14, 2002
For most people, common sense dictates the use of ample whitespace since whitespace makes things easier to read, thus, more legible. Again, you are simply at war with the newbies' definitions.
posted by mischief at 2:22 PM on January 14, 2002
"MetaFilter is a weblog" in name and by arbitrary definition (albeit that of the owner) only, while in reality it is a website that allows users to post messages.
Yes, and the site's owner has repeatedly asked its users to do so in the manner of posts to a weblog rather than posts to a generic message board.
posted by snarkout at 2:25 PM on January 14, 2002
Yes, and the site's owner has repeatedly asked its users to do so in the manner of posts to a weblog rather than posts to a generic message board.
posted by snarkout at 2:25 PM on January 14, 2002
"MetaFilter is a weblog" in name, arbitrary definition of the owner, and format and context in which threads are presented. The details make all the difference.
Whitespace is good. Too much whitespace is bad. Again... abuse and common sense.
posted by tomorama at 2:30 PM on January 14, 2002
Whitespace is good. Too much whitespace is bad. Again... abuse and common sense.
posted by tomorama at 2:30 PM on January 14, 2002
the site's owner has repeatedly asked its users to do so in the manner of posts to a weblog rather than posts to a generic message board.
Where? In MetaTalk? How many users do you think read this section? Have you ever noticed that the respondents are roughly the same 3 or 4 dozen?
This section is separate because many users don't like meta discussions.
posted by mischief at 2:36 PM on January 14, 2002
Where? In MetaTalk? How many users do you think read this section? Have you ever noticed that the respondents are roughly the same 3 or 4 dozen?
This section is separate because many users don't like meta discussions.
posted by mischief at 2:36 PM on January 14, 2002
For most people, common sense dictates the use of ample whitespace since whitespace makes things easier to read, thus, more legible. Again, you are simply at war with the newbies' definitions.
This isn't a generation war.
There is already ample whitespace separating each post on the front page. The design is flexible enough to work with most posts while still remaining usable and legible to everyone. People stated their dislike for a long multi-line post that didn't require all that space in the first place; to ask the person posting to use common sense next time and not use up so much space in an area designed to accommodate more people. There is also the question of usability when people add new line breaks. Users are used to seeing single paragraph posts with metadata information below, with some vertical space separating the next post, but when someone chooses to add more white space, they're possibly confusing users, breaking up the easy readability of single post, single paragraph.
In case anyone didn't realize it, the posting form does not recognize line breaks like a comment form here. If you hit return a few times, it doesn't interpret that automatically, and it requires users to enter HTML code to get that whitespace. When someone goes so far as to physically add code to their post to change the appearance, it better be for a good reason.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:39 PM on January 14, 2002
This isn't a generation war.
There is already ample whitespace separating each post on the front page. The design is flexible enough to work with most posts while still remaining usable and legible to everyone. People stated their dislike for a long multi-line post that didn't require all that space in the first place; to ask the person posting to use common sense next time and not use up so much space in an area designed to accommodate more people. There is also the question of usability when people add new line breaks. Users are used to seeing single paragraph posts with metadata information below, with some vertical space separating the next post, but when someone chooses to add more white space, they're possibly confusing users, breaking up the easy readability of single post, single paragraph.
In case anyone didn't realize it, the posting form does not recognize line breaks like a comment form here. If you hit return a few times, it doesn't interpret that automatically, and it requires users to enter HTML code to get that whitespace. When someone goes so far as to physically add code to their post to change the appearance, it better be for a good reason.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:39 PM on January 14, 2002
This is another example of the inevitable merging of the real world and cyberspace.--mischief
The real world has a set of agreed upon behaviors that are created by society at large. Without these rules and laws, society would break down and anarchy would be the rule. Within society there are subsets of groups that have their own rules that sometimes differ with that of society as a whole, yet abide by the rules that have been laid out by the greater group.
What I'm saying is that MetaFilter has a certain set of rules that most individuals have agreed upon. What I'm seeing here is somebody that doesn't agree with those rules. I don't think the rules in MeFi are all that harsh. What's with all the commotion about them? Why do you have a problem with such simple things? It's not about newbies vs. oldtimers.
posted by ashbury at 2:40 PM on January 14, 2002
The real world has a set of agreed upon behaviors that are created by society at large. Without these rules and laws, society would break down and anarchy would be the rule. Within society there are subsets of groups that have their own rules that sometimes differ with that of society as a whole, yet abide by the rules that have been laid out by the greater group.
What I'm saying is that MetaFilter has a certain set of rules that most individuals have agreed upon. What I'm seeing here is somebody that doesn't agree with those rules. I don't think the rules in MeFi are all that harsh. What's with all the commotion about them? Why do you have a problem with such simple things? It's not about newbies vs. oldtimers.
posted by ashbury at 2:40 PM on January 14, 2002
This was about a badly formed FPP. Now it's about you, mischief.
posted by ashbury at 2:43 PM on January 14, 2002
posted by ashbury at 2:43 PM on January 14, 2002
So i used too many line breaks. I apologise, and shall reserve them only for special moments. I still believe, however, that many mefiers are spending too much time waiting for an opportunity to leap on unsuspecting posters from behind virtual bushes. I received some fairly repugnant emails from some fairly ugly sounding people. not what you want really is it? If criticism could be kept constructive rather than presented in the form of a personal attack then wouldn't we all get along a little better? thanks.
posted by Spoon at 2:45 PM on January 14, 2002
posted by Spoon at 2:45 PM on January 14, 2002
*shudder*
I think mischief has a good point (actually, a couple of them). Newer users are going to continually push the bounderies of what is "acceptable" until there are spelled out admonitions not to do so. But what I think is lacking isn't a tome sized rule book for MeFi, but an acceptance that the MeFi police are trying to help us all, not play "nazi" as many would like to see it as. The only way to do that is to turn the snark drive to minimum, and explain things clearly in METAFILTER threads if need be. Its a simple matter of respect for other users (as Matt just pointed out). Along those lines, mischief, the "buttplug" comment was indicative of the problem. If you want to be part of the solution, and it seems you do, please don't be part of the problem.
Spoon - If criticism could be kept constructive rather than presented in the form of a personal attack then wouldn't we all get along a little better?
My opinion is absolutely, but that requires effort on your part as well. Much of what has been brought up here is redundant. If you haven't listened before, are you sure that its others who are being insensitive to you?
posted by Wulfgar! at 2:55 PM on January 14, 2002
I think mischief has a good point (actually, a couple of them). Newer users are going to continually push the bounderies of what is "acceptable" until there are spelled out admonitions not to do so. But what I think is lacking isn't a tome sized rule book for MeFi, but an acceptance that the MeFi police are trying to help us all, not play "nazi" as many would like to see it as. The only way to do that is to turn the snark drive to minimum, and explain things clearly in METAFILTER threads if need be. Its a simple matter of respect for other users (as Matt just pointed out). Along those lines, mischief, the "buttplug" comment was indicative of the problem. If you want to be part of the solution, and it seems you do, please don't be part of the problem.
Spoon - If criticism could be kept constructive rather than presented in the form of a personal attack then wouldn't we all get along a little better?
My opinion is absolutely, but that requires effort on your part as well. Much of what has been brought up here is redundant. If you haven't listened before, are you sure that its others who are being insensitive to you?
posted by Wulfgar! at 2:55 PM on January 14, 2002
I was wondering if it would help if on the new users page, about page, and whereever else necessary there was a brief note about what MetaTalk is, and how it would be a good idea to also follow MetaTalk to get the gist of how things work?
posted by riffola at 3:13 PM on January 14, 2002
posted by riffola at 3:13 PM on January 14, 2002
This section is separate because many users don't like meta discussions. — mischief
You'd think they'd stay off of MetaFilter, then!
And, Spoon: if people sent you ugly e-mails then they suck. The front page here is the virtual commons, and some of us have come to feel that our vigilance can help maintain the standards that our host has promulgated; so when users transgress out of ignorance or insolence we raise the flag here in MetaTalk. Sometimes our exasperation shows — but there's no need to be mean.
I'll point this out, though: your posts in this thread are much more clearly written and formatted than your front-page posts!
posted by nicwolff at 3:28 PM on January 14, 2002
You'd think they'd stay off of MetaFilter, then!
And, Spoon: if people sent you ugly e-mails then they suck. The front page here is the virtual commons, and some of us have come to feel that our vigilance can help maintain the standards that our host has promulgated; so when users transgress out of ignorance or insolence we raise the flag here in MetaTalk. Sometimes our exasperation shows — but there's no need to be mean.
I'll point this out, though: your posts in this thread are much more clearly written and formatted than your front-page posts!
posted by nicwolff at 3:28 PM on January 14, 2002
Newer users are going to continually push the bounderies of what is "acceptable" until there are spelled out admonitions not to do so.
New losers continually push the boundaries, but most people figure out the norms of a community and try to respect them.
posted by rcade at 5:09 PM on January 14, 2002
New losers continually push the boundaries, but most people figure out the norms of a community and try to respect them.
posted by rcade at 5:09 PM on January 14, 2002
What I'm saying is that MetaFilter has a certain set of rules that most individuals have agreed upon.
That's a rather wide assumption to make, and your statement would probably be more accurate if it read "rules that most veteran users have agreed upon". If 5% of all users read MetaTalk on a semi-regular basis (the bulk of this subset being vets) and fewer still read the guidelines, then the conventions you have established among the veterans do not mean squat.
Consider the discussion in the subject FPP. What little self-policing is present either comes off as ineffectual whining (and thus my "anal retentive" crack) or is camoflaged behind a MetaTalk link. The vehicle for issuing violation alerts is nonexistant.
Matt, while true that users must intentionally insert linebreaks in FPPs, they may not realize that they are not supposed to do that. Most likely they see that as a glitch in the system, not an outright discouragement.
posted by mischief at 5:15 PM on January 14, 2002
That's a rather wide assumption to make, and your statement would probably be more accurate if it read "rules that most veteran users have agreed upon". If 5% of all users read MetaTalk on a semi-regular basis (the bulk of this subset being vets) and fewer still read the guidelines, then the conventions you have established among the veterans do not mean squat.
Consider the discussion in the subject FPP. What little self-policing is present either comes off as ineffectual whining (and thus my "anal retentive" crack) or is camoflaged behind a MetaTalk link. The vehicle for issuing violation alerts is nonexistant.
Matt, while true that users must intentionally insert linebreaks in FPPs, they may not realize that they are not supposed to do that. Most likely they see that as a glitch in the system, not an outright discouragement.
posted by mischief at 5:15 PM on January 14, 2002
I still believe, however, that many mefiers are spending too much time waiting for an opportunity to leap on unsuspecting posters from behind virtual bushes. I received some fairly repugnant emails from some fairly ugly sounding people. . .If criticism could be kept constructive rather than presented in the form of a personal attack then wouldn't we all get along a little better?
Spoon,
I don't know where to start. Really.
You're not new to MeFi, and you're certainly not new to MeTa. Lest anyone forget - four days ago, you posted an FPP separated into three paragraphs and containing red text (on a blue background!!!) for no apparent rhyme or reason. About a month ago, you were called out for being too icky and self-referrential (Matt's words, not mine). And there were a couple of MeTa threads back in November about threads deleted (or not) from the front page because you failed to search for them...
And now you act as if it's a huge surprise that your posts annoy people for one reason or another. There are those who have tried consturctive criticism, and yet MeFi continues to receive rather pointless, ill-formatted, color-blinding double posts from you.
There comes a time when people realize that constructive criticism is not working. That time has come and gone, my friend.
posted by dogmatic at 5:17 PM on January 14, 2002
Spoon,
I don't know where to start. Really.
You're not new to MeFi, and you're certainly not new to MeTa. Lest anyone forget - four days ago, you posted an FPP separated into three paragraphs and containing red text (on a blue background!!!) for no apparent rhyme or reason. About a month ago, you were called out for being too icky and self-referrential (Matt's words, not mine). And there were a couple of MeTa threads back in November about threads deleted (or not) from the front page because you failed to search for them...
And now you act as if it's a huge surprise that your posts annoy people for one reason or another. There are those who have tried consturctive criticism, and yet MeFi continues to receive rather pointless, ill-formatted, color-blinding double posts from you.
There comes a time when people realize that constructive criticism is not working. That time has come and gone, my friend.
posted by dogmatic at 5:17 PM on January 14, 2002
Why does Spoon remind me of Ralph Wiggum?
posted by obiwanwasabi at 5:46 PM on January 14, 2002
posted by obiwanwasabi at 5:46 PM on January 14, 2002
That's a rather wide assumption to make, and your statement would probably be more accurate if it read "rules that most veteran users have agreed upon".
Actually it would be more accurate to say "rules that follow directly from what the site owner and administrator has said are his wishes". I don't, as some others seem to do, wish to interpret Matt's will. But whether I agree with some of your points or not, mischief, it doesn't work to dismiss the fact that we're here by invite (open or not). Just because I don't exemplify the rules, doesn't mean that they're not there. They're Matt's, and many who've "agreed upon" them have done so because his will is the law of his property, this site. The graceful indulgence of the site admin/owner should never be interpreted as a sumptuary right to behave as you please. And ignorance of the "law", especially after repeated warnings and links to the hidden realm of MetaTalk, is not a very good excuse.
posted by Wulfgar! at 6:34 PM on January 14, 2002
Actually it would be more accurate to say "rules that follow directly from what the site owner and administrator has said are his wishes". I don't, as some others seem to do, wish to interpret Matt's will. But whether I agree with some of your points or not, mischief, it doesn't work to dismiss the fact that we're here by invite (open or not). Just because I don't exemplify the rules, doesn't mean that they're not there. They're Matt's, and many who've "agreed upon" them have done so because his will is the law of his property, this site. The graceful indulgence of the site admin/owner should never be interpreted as a sumptuary right to behave as you please. And ignorance of the "law", especially after repeated warnings and links to the hidden realm of MetaTalk, is not a very good excuse.
posted by Wulfgar! at 6:34 PM on January 14, 2002
rcade - New losers continually push the boundaries, but most people figure out the norms of a community and try to respect them.
I would like to think that, but the truth remains that this is an anonymous oasis in the desert of the Internet, and any who feel like they have an oportunity to be impo'tant here will try and do so. I don't think the point here is how some newbies fail to live up to the expectations of veterans such as yourself, but rather how (if) we can control the environment so that shout out opinion posts don't gain the upper hand in this community blog of blogs. Respecting "new losers" might be a start in helping them to respect the society they've entered, wouldn't you agree?
posted by Wulfgar! at 6:43 PM on January 14, 2002
I would like to think that, but the truth remains that this is an anonymous oasis in the desert of the Internet, and any who feel like they have an oportunity to be impo'tant here will try and do so. I don't think the point here is how some newbies fail to live up to the expectations of veterans such as yourself, but rather how (if) we can control the environment so that shout out opinion posts don't gain the upper hand in this community blog of blogs. Respecting "new losers" might be a start in helping them to respect the society they've entered, wouldn't you agree?
posted by Wulfgar! at 6:43 PM on January 14, 2002
"Me fail MetaFilter? Unpossible!"
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:47 PM on January 14, 2002
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:47 PM on January 14, 2002
A friend of mine did a 3D render of a blocky wireframe psychotic looking chicken-bird. He called it "Bizzaro Cock". I have no idea why I just thought of that ... really. ;-)
posted by Wulfgar! at 6:52 PM on January 14, 2002
posted by Wulfgar! at 6:52 PM on January 14, 2002
the site owner and administrator has said are his wishes
You can preach Matt's sermon and pound on the theory all you want, but when the only people you are reaching are those few who wander into this area, you have to admit that something is broke and the message is not getting through. You can scream yourselves blue in the face in MetaTalk and post the clearest guidelines in the world, but if your intended audience doesn't read them, they are absolutely worthless.
posted by mischief at 6:53 PM on January 14, 2002
You can preach Matt's sermon and pound on the theory all you want, but when the only people you are reaching are those few who wander into this area, you have to admit that something is broke and the message is not getting through. You can scream yourselves blue in the face in MetaTalk and post the clearest guidelines in the world, but if your intended audience doesn't read them, they are absolutely worthless.
posted by mischief at 6:53 PM on January 14, 2002
Spoon, despite caveats, I wish to thank you for your post as it did give me exposure to artists I never would have found otherwise. You can probably count me as a Cardiacs fan now. I understand the point you were making with your post, but the format and language of it allow for criticism.
posted by nonreflectiveobject at 6:54 PM on January 14, 2002
posted by nonreflectiveobject at 6:54 PM on January 14, 2002
mischief - It isn't like nobody's tried. Blame those trying all you want, but sooner or later, the individual poster has to take some responsibility for what they do. I think you have some good points, but this is where you and I part ways.
posted by Wulfgar! at 6:58 PM on January 14, 2002
posted by Wulfgar! at 6:58 PM on January 14, 2002
Wulfgar: I know you have tried. I have seen this same scenario dozens of times over the last 25 years, from Delphi through Fidonet and onto the internet. Communities evolve from what they once were into something else.
The users will not take responsibility for their posts if they know they can get away with flouting the rules. When was the last time someone was publicly kicked off MeFi for an unacceptable series of minor violations? Has Matt made an example of someone in the last few months? Rules must be enforced quickly and without prejudice, otherwise users will scoff at them.
posted by mischief at 8:00 PM on January 14, 2002
The users will not take responsibility for their posts if they know they can get away with flouting the rules. When was the last time someone was publicly kicked off MeFi for an unacceptable series of minor violations? Has Matt made an example of someone in the last few months? Rules must be enforced quickly and without prejudice, otherwise users will scoff at them.
posted by mischief at 8:00 PM on January 14, 2002
hey insomnyuk.. fear not, i posted that link for you a while ago..
posted by lotsofno at 8:13 PM on January 14, 2002
posted by lotsofno at 8:13 PM on January 14, 2002
mischief - about 14 days ago. In fact somebody's account may well have been terminated since then - it just happens to be one I remembered.
As far as I can tell, Matt tries to rule with a light hand. He seems to suspect that if he treats people like adults, most will reciprocate and act like adults. Part of that is the basic netiquette of determining community standards and agreeing to be bound by them. All of the metatalking, and all of the in-line comments are largely aimed at helping people to learn what those standards are. Sometimes it can get a little snarky, but basically it's intended to be helpful.
Of course I never get tired of all these you're not the boss of me arguments. Fortunately most people crying foul seem to shape up eventually or leave for pastures more to their liking.
posted by willnot at 9:19 PM on January 14, 2002
As far as I can tell, Matt tries to rule with a light hand. He seems to suspect that if he treats people like adults, most will reciprocate and act like adults. Part of that is the basic netiquette of determining community standards and agreeing to be bound by them. All of the metatalking, and all of the in-line comments are largely aimed at helping people to learn what those standards are. Sometimes it can get a little snarky, but basically it's intended to be helpful.
Of course I never get tired of all these you're not the boss of me arguments. Fortunately most people crying foul seem to shape up eventually or leave for pastures more to their liking.
posted by willnot at 9:19 PM on January 14, 2002
You can scream yourselves blue in the face in MetaTalk and post the clearest guidelines in the world, but if your intended audience doesn't read them, they are absolutely worthless.
The point of MetaTalk isn't to ensure good behavior among everyone who visits the site. Some casual visitors are never going to care enough about MetaFilter to wade through these endless etiquette discussions.
However, once you're insane enough to jump into MetaTalk and read an entire thread like this one, you're susceptible to our pernicious influence.
Respecting "new losers" might be a start in helping them to respect the society they've entered, wouldn't you agree?
True. But I think the kind of people who intentionally push the boundaries are few and far between (remember Private Parts?), and most new users behave as well -- if not better -- than us MetaFilter lifers.
posted by rcade at 5:39 AM on January 15, 2002
The point of MetaTalk isn't to ensure good behavior among everyone who visits the site. Some casual visitors are never going to care enough about MetaFilter to wade through these endless etiquette discussions.
However, once you're insane enough to jump into MetaTalk and read an entire thread like this one, you're susceptible to our pernicious influence.
Respecting "new losers" might be a start in helping them to respect the society they've entered, wouldn't you agree?
True. But I think the kind of people who intentionally push the boundaries are few and far between (remember Private Parts?), and most new users behave as well -- if not better -- than us MetaFilter lifers.
posted by rcade at 5:39 AM on January 15, 2002
However, once you're insane enough to jump into MetaTalk and read an entire thread like this one, you're susceptible to our pernicious influence.
This is beautiful. This should be auto-taglined at the top of every Meta thread over 30 comments. Maybe you're not my True MeFi Nemesis after all, Rogers!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:11 AM on January 15, 2002
This is beautiful. This should be auto-taglined at the top of every Meta thread over 30 comments. Maybe you're not my True MeFi Nemesis after all, Rogers!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:11 AM on January 15, 2002
If I didn't know better, I'd think Mischief was me. I know better. S/he's worse. At least I knew when to quit.
"Communities evolve from what they once were into something else. The users will not take responsibility for their posts if they know they can get away with flouting the rules." Blah blahblah blah..
Give it up, chief. Take it from someone who has already tread the unbeaten path you are now carelessly going. Either play by the rules of the sandbox in MeFi, or go somewhere else. You can't win. Don't waste their time or yours. You can't save their world with your self-defined superior common sense, because there's nothing here that needs to be saved by the likes of you, and this place is not a captive audience for your audacity.
You think based on your experience, you can see the inevitable signs of interpersonal entropy within an online community. You think you can do something to stop it. You cannot. Like all others that have come before it, "from Delphi through Fidonet and onto the internet," MeFi will sink or swim as it is destined, and you are helpless to change or improve the inevitable. So quit trying to save the world from the errors of the past that you have seen. You are no saviour. You are nothing but small glowing letters on a screen to these people.
Of course after reading these words you won't stop. If anything, you'll just bitch and whine even louder. Again, I know. Because I've walked the path you now tread, and I wasn't able to check my ego at the door either. Fine. Crash and burn. I'll enjoy watching you. Please continue your petty bickering. It amuses me.
posted by ZachsMind at 6:16 AM on January 15, 2002
"Communities evolve from what they once were into something else. The users will not take responsibility for their posts if they know they can get away with flouting the rules." Blah blahblah blah..
Give it up, chief. Take it from someone who has already tread the unbeaten path you are now carelessly going. Either play by the rules of the sandbox in MeFi, or go somewhere else. You can't win. Don't waste their time or yours. You can't save their world with your self-defined superior common sense, because there's nothing here that needs to be saved by the likes of you, and this place is not a captive audience for your audacity.
You think based on your experience, you can see the inevitable signs of interpersonal entropy within an online community. You think you can do something to stop it. You cannot. Like all others that have come before it, "from Delphi through Fidonet and onto the internet," MeFi will sink or swim as it is destined, and you are helpless to change or improve the inevitable. So quit trying to save the world from the errors of the past that you have seen. You are no saviour. You are nothing but small glowing letters on a screen to these people.
Of course after reading these words you won't stop. If anything, you'll just bitch and whine even louder. Again, I know. Because I've walked the path you now tread, and I wasn't able to check my ego at the door either. Fine. Crash and burn. I'll enjoy watching you. Please continue your petty bickering. It amuses me.
posted by ZachsMind at 6:16 AM on January 15, 2002
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by machaus at 5:54 AM on January 14, 2002