How much will we talk about 9-11?

September 4, 2002 1:09 PM

Can the September jitters, already being felt from all sides of the political table, be in any way lessened or avoided?
posted by MiguelCardoso to Etiquette/Policy at 1:09 PM (54 comments total)

Yes. Restraint will be at a premium in the next week. Valium, anyone?

This thread is a great litmus test.
posted by Shane at 1:10 PM on September 4, 2002

you'd think, but probably not. short of matt asking people for a moratorium on politically-themed posts for a while.
posted by moz at 1:11 PM on September 4, 2002

Maybe Matt could add a MIDI of "Why Can't We Be Friends?" to the front page.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 1:13 PM on September 4, 2002

Valium, anyone?

Yes please.
posted by PrinceValium at 1:15 PM on September 4, 2002

It can be helped by people actually reading and responding to the link instead of freaking out because of the identity of the poster.

Restraint, indeed, is a good thing.

And isn't this really the same MeTa post as this?
posted by Kafkaesque at 1:15 PM on September 4, 2002

I say let bring it on. I just wish people would:
1. State your opinion about the post topic
or
2. State something technically wrong with others post (i.e. logic or a link to data)
or
3.move on
We just need to make it clear that this is not a chat channel but you are allowed to have an opinion (even if a violent one) just keep it intelligent.

I also like the idea of the lone 9-11 thread on the side bar that could act as almost a second front page.
posted by Dr_Octavius at 1:18 PM on September 4, 2002

Upon preview inpection what Kafkaesque said.
posted by Dr_Octavius at 1:20 PM on September 4, 2002

Upon preview inspection what Kafkaesque said.
posted by Dr_Octavius at 1:21 PM on September 4, 2002

It can be helped by people actually reading and responding to the link instead of freaking out because of the identity of the poster.

I don't know about that, kaf. The post consists of more than the link -- it also includes the text the poster uses to surround the link. In this case (imho), foldy saw this as an opportunity to use the front page as a mechanism to express yet again his oft-stated view that the U.S. "contributed so mightily" to the events of September 11. He has every right to express that opinion, of course, just as I have every right to criticize that argument as ridiculous moral relativism.
posted by pardonyou? at 1:22 PM on September 4, 2002

That post, by anyone else, had a chance of starting off a coherent discussion. Thankfully, owillis and evanizer jumped in with quick thinking and broke up the possibility of thoughtful discourse because of the history of the poster. It's good that people are keeping on the ball and making sure to flame foldy right out of the gate. I think we need a list of people with unpopular opinions. Then email can immediately be sent out to anyone who wants to post unprovoked attacks on the poster.

Thank god for the reactionary mefites, without them, we would have nothing.

(and, on preview, sucks when people have opinions, huh?)
posted by eyeballkid at 1:26 PM on September 4, 2002

Not September jitters (although I am quivering a bit from the assertion made in that thread that the religious-based murder of thousands of people and serious screwing up the life of many, many people in America is "awareness raising"). It's the fact that foldy has consistently trolled this board, and made very, very little effort to contribute to or interact with the community (sorry, Andrew Sullivan, but this is a community), except when it serves his own ideological interests. I'm not a fan of his comments in threads, but comments are different than posting to the main page. It seems that foldy picks things to post for the precise reason of riling and polarizing the community. Matt seems to let him stay because he tends to be slightly more intelligent than your average troll (he's a doctor, after all) but there are those of us who are just weary of the selfishness of this type of contributor. Here's a pertinent comment from Matt about this type of behaviour.

And as for my use of the word "fuckwit", I thought we came to the consensus that "fuckwit" was the acceptable (and basically meaningless) MeFi swear word. I can't find the several discussions of the Metafilter usage of the word, since I'm a total fuckwit when it comes to search engine usage.
posted by evanizer at 1:27 PM on September 4, 2002

Tagline for next week: Valium, not Lariam.
posted by gottabefunky at 1:28 PM on September 4, 2002

I used to hang at a Delphi forum with a really diverse, intelligent crowd, but plenty of baiters and just plain Cooler-Than-Thou's. Maybe I was hyper-sensitive to some of the stuff there, too -- I'll accept a little blame.

After a thread on that forum about a plane crash after 9/11 in which someone said, "Bush better get over there and kill... more people...", I posted a couple angry comments. Then I swore I would never post again without a 24-hour waiting period, during which I would ask myself, "Why do I want to post this comment? What will come of it? Is it constructive or informative? Etc."

I never regretted (or broke) that waiting period.

Perhaps a 15-minute waiting period before commenting on 9/11 posts wouldn't be such a bad thing for us to enforce on ourselves?
posted by Shane at 1:30 PM on September 4, 2002

My feeling is that a lot of us are nervous. I'm generally calm but, as the day approaches and posts start mentioning September 11, I find myself being unusually aggressive (today in the Film Festival post and in f&m's post too) and touchy, as if I feared people were going to disrespect what is my take on what the anniversary means. And that's just anxiety, I guess, and it comes across as shallow - because it is.

A year ago the tragedy united us; this time I fear it will tear us apart (if you'll forgive the melodramatic turn).
posted by MiguelCardoso at 1:31 PM on September 4, 2002

Upon preview inpection what Kafkaesque said.
posted by jacknose at 1:31 PM on September 4, 2002

...just as I have every right to criticize that argument as ridiculous moral relativism.

Of course. But not to engage in asinine name-calling.
posted by Kafkaesque at 1:32 PM on September 4, 2002

Upon preview inpection what Dr_Octavius said about what Kafkaesque said.

posted by jacknose at 1:32 PM on September 4, 2002

Not to be a quodlibertarian here, but, although I'm a fan of "fuckwit", I only like to see it used as a teasing word between friends, not an attack. I'm not saying we should all hold hands and be pals, but we should at least TRY to have a community of mutual respect.

You silly fuckwit.
posted by ColdChef at 1:34 PM on September 4, 2002

pardonyou: I don't think anyone could complain about your comments in that thread, they were on topic, and directly on point.

I think the thing that bothers people is the "fuckwit" posts. With that said...

I'm pretty damn lefty, I think there are many valid points about past inept US foreign policy and repeating those errors... and I think the post is crap.

It was a hideously written, lacking in any specific criticiism (its all lies! corporations bad! peace!), and seriously could not provoke anything but an inane left-right slugfest. And this is the latest in a long string of such posts from the same poster.

It doesn't excuse it, but I understand where both owillis and evanizer are coming from. The correct response is to ignore the thread, maybe meta if your really irate, or, if you can't muster that, I recommend talking about camels.
posted by malphigian at 1:38 PM on September 4, 2002

Upon preview inpection what jacknose said about what Dr_Octavius said about what Kafkaesque said.
posted by adampsyche at 1:40 PM on September 4, 2002

I also recommend proofreading. *sigh*
posted by malphigian at 1:40 PM on September 4, 2002

I second Kaf's remark. It's inevitable that there are going to be posts of all kinds regarding int'l politics over the next 10 or so day, from all sides of the political spectrum. This is just one of the first.

What can we do? Either ignore it or at least make a civilized comment about why you disagree with the post, not the post-er. Personal attacks have absolutely NO redeeming value in ANY community. And there is absolutely nothing good that can come from them. Yet, they'll still happen.

Matt seems to let him stay because he tends to be slightly more intelligent than your average troll

He is extremely intelligent. I don't speak for Matt, but I think the reason that foldy is still here and not banned is more b/c he doesn't engage in personal attacks and backs up most everything he says. Yes, he may have a sense of hyperbole or a flair for the dramatic, but as far as "trolls" go (and personally I don't see him as one) he's pretty tame and personable. (feel free to prove me wrong).

And yes, Evan, fuckwit is the MeFi insult of choice. However, I don't think you can toss it off flippantly in any situation and assume that it won't be taken personally or with a grain of salt. I don't think any insult is tame enough for that absolute statement.

And on preview, what everyone else b/w Kaf and this post said while I was typing it.
posted by Ufez Jones at 1:42 PM on September 4, 2002

What malphigian said.
posted by timeistight at 1:44 PM on September 4, 2002

Everyone should just keep taking deep breaths. Many, if not all, of us are prone to some degree of ipsedixitism, and the coming week will test the abilities of all of us to moderate our responses when we see others so engaged.

ummm - like Ufez said.
posted by yhbc at 1:45 PM on September 4, 2002

quodlibertarians?--I hear they're trying to get Jesse Ventura to run for preisdent on their ticket.
posted by y2karl at 1:47 PM on September 4, 2002

That would be the QUAD-libertarians.

Unless that's actually the group that works for less government for college dormitories.

okay, I think I've gone sufficiently off-topic now.
posted by yhbc at 1:50 PM on September 4, 2002

Actually, yhbc, many, if not all, of us are also prone to some degree of copromancy, and the abilities of all of us to moderate our responses when we see others so engaged will be tested forever. Remember to flush.
posted by y2karl at 1:56 PM on September 4, 2002

Matt seems to let him stay because he tends to be slightly more intelligent than your average troll (he's a doctor, after all) but there are those of us who are just weary of the selfishness of this type of contributor.

I've probably never agreed once with the guy -- I still think that most of the time he cant be serious, like when he wrote that eating a burger is as morally repugnant as crashing a hijacked plane in the WTC -- and of course he basically despises all of us.

But I'd be appalled if he gets kicked out for this FPP

If "foldy the Commie troll" has to go for today's offense, then many other Rightwing, Likud ass-kissing trolls should have to go as well, to be fair, sorry

And evan, we're 15,000plus people here, we're all weary of something -- I for example am weary of the gleeful gung-ho warmongering of many chickenhawk users, and of those who think public health care is a Communistic, evil concept for example. I just learnt to live with it. We all have to

posted by matteo at 1:59 PM on September 4, 2002

As far as trolls go, this is one of his more benign ones. But hey, he gets to stay - ain't my sandbox.
posted by owillis at 2:02 PM on September 4, 2002

pardonyou: I don't think anyone could complain about your comments in that thread, they were on topic, and directly on point.

Thanks. I didn't think so, but I guess (to quote my Portuguese friend) I too am feeling "touchy." I find it personally difficult to simply ignore a post that tries to mitigate the horrible human toll of September 11th by arguing that (to one degree or another) the U.S. brought it on itself. Obviously nerves are still raw, and I don't hold out any hope that future 9/11 threads will evolve any differently.
posted by pardonyou? at 2:02 PM on September 4, 2002

Let's just put it all down to matutolypea.
posted by liam at 2:18 PM on September 4, 2002

Sorry, matteo (et al), but "chicken hawk" has and will always have quite a different meaning to some of us. Whenever I see it in its new, leftist-propaganda sense, I'm always given pause... "Wait, you mean X is a chicken hawk? I didn't even know he was gay!"
posted by evanizer at 2:26 PM on September 4, 2002

I don't hold out any hope that future 9/11 threads will evolve any differently.

This thread is a great litmus test.

Add my vote to the "Some kind of temporary 9/11 post restrictions, whether mandatory or suggested" column.
posted by gsteff at 2:28 PM on September 4, 2002

Let's just put it all down to matutolypea.

...or maledictaphobia
posted by jonmc at 2:29 PM on September 4, 2002

Any attack is wrong. Evanizer was wrong. If he doesn't like fold's posts, why does he feel compelled to "shit on his threads," to paraphrase dejah from another Meta thread? If Matt deems it a bad post, he will remove it. Barging into the thread and waving your penis around is just grandstanding.
posted by rushmc at 2:35 PM on September 4, 2002

Day of remembrance; peace and quiet. Or just plain old fashioned respect for the dead and living, not that hard Mig.

Maybe let Meta go on holiday and have the front page of Meta sit idle for once. No words will say more.
posted by thomcatspike at 2:36 PM on September 4, 2002

evan, thanks for the link, I'm always happy to improve my colloquial English -- really didn't know about it, I knew about Dorothy and some other stuff, but my knowledge was limited. I printed it, interesting stuff.

One question: when Republicans gave Clinton a lot of shit for the draft-dodging, did you consider it "rightwing propaganda?"

Because, you know, I'm not sure it's all liberal lies in the link I posted, I wouldn't bet money on the fact that those Republicans really wanted to go and fight... I'm afraid that they sent poorer, less-educated, not-well-connected boys to fight and possibly die in their place. Where's the propaganda? Draft-dodging is a fact, it's not about political parties.

(I'm bipartisan here, it's the same for Dems, starting with Bill C -- you wanna get elected commander in chief et similia, well, try not to dodge the fucking draft. I'm not saying serving in the Armed Forces is required. But, if there's the draft, you have to go to gain my respect. Otherwise? Chicken!)

posted by matteo at 2:43 PM on September 4, 2002

Its been pointed out before that f_and_m posts things that are deliberately inflammatory and fails to offer comment or support in any effort to interact with all us plebes. And in fact, when any of us try to elicit some more reasoned response, he/she/it invariably ups the ante by posting a non-sequiter comment showing what blind cattle we all are. There is much to support f_and_m's positions. I just wish the majority of it was being presented by someone who wasn't such a trollish ass about it.

And I'm particularly annoyed by the number of people here who decried that "hype" that 9/11 has or will elicit, and that don't seem to understand that f_and_m played the 9/11 card in exactly the same way that the media or the admin branch of government will. You have to pay attention to the agenda because this event requires it. No, it doesn't, and foldy or Bush can't make me wake up from my blissful American dream any faster by playing the "fear card". I ask you, who posted the first "9/11 memorial and how we all just gotta feel about it" link? fold_and_mutilate did. Its manipulation, pure and simple. And it really insults (or should) the intelligence of any who want to understand things that this post in question was put out there precisely to evoke response that fosters the poster's disdain for all us ignert batrayerss of moral human naturens.

If evanizer wants to call him/her/it a fuckwit, so what? It asked for that just to validate its own superiority.

(Sorry Miguel, but this person's laughing at us all, including you, and hiding behind the idea that we're afraid of introspection and alternate views.)
posted by Wulfgar! at 2:52 PM on September 4, 2002

Sorry, there was supposed to be an "and" in there.
posted by Wulfgar! at 2:57 PM on September 4, 2002

Barging into the thread and waving your penis around is just grandstanding.

Oops, sorry. In my house, barging in and waving your penis around is mandatory. That is, if you want the respect of the host.

And matteo, I didn't say propaganda was bad, it's just propaganda. If that had been a list of liberal politicians who "dodged the draft", it would be right-wing propaganda.
posted by evanizer at 3:00 PM on September 4, 2002

It...seriously could not provoke anything but an inane left-right slugfest.

Amen. The way fold_and_mutilate framed the post just plain shits on the community. S/he could have *easily* posted the (inflammatory enough) article without aggressively slathering his/her outrageous opinions all over the front page. It's just disrespectful to tell people how to think about a post. If you have to do it, at least *try* to do it gently.

If evanizer wants to call him/her/it a fuckwit, so what?

evanizer played right into f_and_m's hands; it was understandable, perhaps, but not smart to react that way. And why are people so horribly concerned about 9/11 posts, anyway? The discussion hasn't stopped here since last September and will continue until next September and beyond. The alleged horrors we'll be seeing a week from today can't be any worse than what the site's seen -- and handled perfectly well -- before.
posted by mediareport at 3:14 PM on September 4, 2002

Who is getting offended by fuckwit? Had the thread been about fuckwits, then the comment would have been warranted.

Or has this lingering anniversary anaesthetized us to the point where we're incapable of having teeth

Did I miss something? What the fuck does that have to do with attacking the poster?
posted by eyeballkid at 3:26 PM on September 4, 2002

If evanizer wants to call him/her/it a fuckwit, so what? It asked for that just to validate its own superiority.

So, because f'n'm's too blatantly disrespectful of the social norms at this particular party, Evanizer should also disregard said social norms?

There's a place for etiquette talk.
posted by cCranium at 3:27 PM on September 4, 2002

If you can't distinguish between reason and jokey responses, then what the hell are you doing here?

Once again: not everything reads as funny as it sounds. As far as I can tell, the nastiness in that thread was pretty damn high. I can't always tell when people are kidding, however. But also: I'm not sure the writer can always tell.

We could start on the topic of aggression and humor (cf Freud).
posted by RJ Reynolds at 3:29 PM on September 4, 2002

There's a place for etiquette talk.


And considering that this is "etiquette/policy" this would be it. Are you suggesting that evanizer should have hauled f'n'm into MetaTalk yet again? It certainly does no good. At least the "fuckwit" comment made both parties feel better. Beyond that, I refer you to ed. (Good luck!)
posted by Wulfgar! at 3:35 PM on September 4, 2002

Are you suggesting that evanizer should have hauled f'n'm into MetaTalk yet again

Yes. It's here so we can raise issues of etiquette. Metafilter threads are there to discuss the link(s).

Beyond that, I refer you to ed.

Oh, I'm sorry if I was confusing. I heartily agree with evanizer, I think f'n'm's a fuckwit, and not in the jokey sense, and I don't particularily care that he used the word. But my opinion of f'n'm has no bearing on where evanizer's comment should've been.
posted by cCranium at 3:54 PM on September 4, 2002

he tends to be slightly more intelligent than your average troll (he's a doctor, after all)

Good God. What a bedside manner he must have.
posted by kindall at 4:05 PM on September 4, 2002

Good God. What a bedside manner he must have.

On this subject, I am well experienced--his bedside manner is quite likely smooth as silk, all peaches and cream. Doctors compartmentalize to the nth degree. Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde is the archetype for a real phenomenom, trust me.
posted by y2karl at 5:13 PM on September 4, 2002

Long fucking post, lost into the aether. Great.

The Gist : If cC switched the names in his post above, I'd agree. Foldy's post was weak, and linked to a badly written article, but was otherwise totally acceptable. And evanizer's response (and owillis's for that matter) were precisely what I might have expected.

I'm surprised and pleased f_and_m is still here, with all the hounding he (gender assumption) endures. But, as others have theorized, maybe he enjoys it. But this conversation should not be about f_and_m, or evanizer for that matter.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:36 PM on September 4, 2002

But this conversation should not be about f_and_m, or evanizer for that matter.

Yes! Whatever happened to water balloons and happycats?

Oatmeal is squishy.
posted by poopy at 6:30 PM on September 4, 2002

And why are people so horribly concerned about 9/11 posts, anyway?

just wait until Iraq Attaq begins, man
posted by matteo at 6:54 PM on September 4, 2002

Did anyone else see yesterday (Sept.3rd) on Frontline (PBS) Faith and Doubt at Ground Zero? Besides being an extremely powerful and intelligent presentation, it showed for the first time (to me) people jumping to their deaths, which served in the program as the source to questions, "What is the nature of evil?" "Is religion itself to blame, or is it our last refuge?" "What faith can be salvaged from Ground Zero?"


posted by semmi at 7:43 PM on September 4, 2002

"What faith can be salvaged from Ground Zero?"

None. If you didn't have any before 9/11, I'm not sure you'd find it from bodies raining down on your head.
posted by mediareport at 9:52 PM on September 4, 2002

"What is the nature of evil?"

People. IMHO.
posted by Shane at 6:32 AM on September 5, 2002