Less is more... September 9, 2002 3:28 AM Subscribe
*comforts quonsar*
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:29 AM on September 9, 2002
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:29 AM on September 9, 2002
Unfortunately I think MeFi's inevitably going to be swamped in 9/11 stuff, brace yourselves.
As for the wider issues to do with rubbish posts, I reckon a carefully-worded summary of the guidelines (in 2 or 3 lines) is needed on the Post a Link page, including a mention of how news stories and links taken from other major sites are unlikely to make good posts in themselves. I'd put it in bold just above the form, followed by the link to the guidelines page.
A lot of people just won't read and consider a whole page of guidelines, it's better to avoid some of the poor posts by adjusting the site design rather than just pounce on people afterwards. I'd imagine a lot of people merrily register and post a 'cool link' like they would on any other discussion board, having ignored the boring 'terms & conditions' type stuff.
posted by malevolent at 4:39 AM on September 9, 2002
As for the wider issues to do with rubbish posts, I reckon a carefully-worded summary of the guidelines (in 2 or 3 lines) is needed on the Post a Link page, including a mention of how news stories and links taken from other major sites are unlikely to make good posts in themselves. I'd put it in bold just above the form, followed by the link to the guidelines page.
A lot of people just won't read and consider a whole page of guidelines, it's better to avoid some of the poor posts by adjusting the site design rather than just pounce on people afterwards. I'd imagine a lot of people merrily register and post a 'cool link' like they would on any other discussion board, having ignored the boring 'terms & conditions' type stuff.
posted by malevolent at 4:39 AM on September 9, 2002
the sight of that linkless comment disguised as a post, circling in and piercing the metafilter superstructure was just too horrifying. oh, the humanity!
Beautifully put.
We had to suffer through it once already, must we rehash it again?
posted by justgary at 4:43 AM on September 9, 2002
Beautifully put.
We had to suffer through it once already, must we rehash it again?
posted by justgary at 4:43 AM on September 9, 2002
must we rehash it again?
Well, I think we will have to again & again until people get the message & read the posting guidelines before posting.
malevolent: Good suggestion...can you write a summary?
posted by i_cola at 5:03 AM on September 9, 2002
Well, I think we will have to again & again until people get the message & read the posting guidelines before posting.
malevolent: Good suggestion...can you write a summary?
posted by i_cola at 5:03 AM on September 9, 2002
Can't the code be modified so that if there's nothing in the URL and link title fields, and no <a> tag in the description field, the post cannot be made, and with a warning to that effect?
Granted, it won't stop someone from posting a shite link just to get it posted, but it surely couldn't hurt.
posted by mcwetboy at 5:15 AM on September 9, 2002
Granted, it won't stop someone from posting a shite link just to get it posted, but it surely couldn't hurt.
posted by mcwetboy at 5:15 AM on September 9, 2002
Well, I think we will have to again & again until people get the message & read the posting guidelines before posting.
You have more confidence in people than I do. What's the saying?
"Make something idiot-proof and someone will build a better idiot."
I'm not calling anyone an idiot, I'm just saying...
posted by justgary at 5:18 AM on September 9, 2002
You have more confidence in people than I do. What's the saying?
"Make something idiot-proof and someone will build a better idiot."
I'm not calling anyone an idiot, I'm just saying...
posted by justgary at 5:18 AM on September 9, 2002
"Make something idiot-proof, and nature will build a better idiot."
posted by Irontom at 5:29 AM on September 9, 2002
posted by Irontom at 5:29 AM on September 9, 2002
I thought this came the closest of anything to an appropriate linkless post. It was the first entry on September 12, and began a day of some serious venting. It broke the rules, but it was emotional, things needed to be said, and we all cleaned up afterwards.
Now, when I see it happening again on 9/9/02, it feels like rehashing, Fox News style. It's cheesy, it's annoying, don't do it here.
posted by PrinceValium at 5:32 AM on September 9, 2002
Now, when I see it happening again on 9/9/02, it feels like rehashing, Fox News style. It's cheesy, it's annoying, don't do it here.
posted by PrinceValium at 5:32 AM on September 9, 2002
The post, for posterity:
No link here. Just wondering...the 9/11 anniversary...I am not ready for it. The wound is still too raw. I am still not comfortable looking at those images, but everywhere I turn television and magazines are plastered with them. There's no escape. I think it's too soon to be faced with this barrage. Am I alone? My first post...be gentle.
On a sidenote, when metafilter members suggest to you (or anyone you know) to "get your own blog" it is not meant in the dismissive, you suck and should never post here again, tone that it is sometimes read with. It means just that -- that we want you to sign up at blogger or radio and start a blog. Spout of daily. Or even more than that. Have guest bloggers. Become a publishing magnate.
Really, do it. But don't do it here.
posted by zpousman at 5:33 AM on September 9, 2002
No link here. Just wondering...the 9/11 anniversary...I am not ready for it. The wound is still too raw. I am still not comfortable looking at those images, but everywhere I turn television and magazines are plastered with them. There's no escape. I think it's too soon to be faced with this barrage. Am I alone? My first post...be gentle.
On a sidenote, when metafilter members suggest to you (or anyone you know) to "get your own blog" it is not meant in the dismissive, you suck and should never post here again, tone that it is sometimes read with. It means just that -- that we want you to sign up at blogger or radio and start a blog. Spout of daily. Or even more than that. Have guest bloggers. Become a publishing magnate.
Really, do it. But don't do it here.
posted by zpousman at 5:33 AM on September 9, 2002
Can't the code be modified so that if there's nothing in the URL and link title fields, and no <a> tag in the description field, the post cannot be made, and with a warning to that effect?
But a determined person could get around that by inserting
<--a dummy comment hiding a <a href="http://foo.com/">link</a> just to fool the no-link-detection.-->
posted by rory at 5:37 AM on September 9, 2002
But a determined person could get around that by inserting
<--a dummy comment hiding a <a href="http://foo.com/">link</a> just to fool the no-link-detection.-->
posted by rory at 5:37 AM on September 9, 2002
Woil made the pertinent comment that the absence of a link made the point more eloquently than any link.
Metafilter is not living up to its name, with the glut of gratuitous and vapid 9/11 coverage that has appeared on the front page recently. I see wsg's post as an (admittedly minor) wake-up call to us all, whether it was meant that way or not.
As a non-New Yorker (and indeed non-American) I am finding it hard to sustain my sense of reality and appreciation of the true implications of these events in the face of the tacky media wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Wahey! My first MeTa post! Be gentle.
posted by cogat at 5:39 AM on September 9, 2002
Metafilter is not living up to its name, with the glut of gratuitous and vapid 9/11 coverage that has appeared on the front page recently. I see wsg's post as an (admittedly minor) wake-up call to us all, whether it was meant that way or not.
As a non-New Yorker (and indeed non-American) I am finding it hard to sustain my sense of reality and appreciation of the true implications of these events in the face of the tacky media wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Wahey! My first MeTa post! Be gentle.
posted by cogat at 5:39 AM on September 9, 2002
I've been a member of metafilter for a short while now, but have read pretty much daily for many many months. The result is I have a pretty good idea of what constitutes a good metafilter post (I would hope).
Although I agree that metafilter's front page was no place for the discussion point that this post was, some of the resulting responses were somewhat extreme.
In fact, it certainly puts me off wanting to posting anything whatsoever (I'm yet to make my first post).
posted by nthdegx at 5:41 AM on September 9, 2002
Although I agree that metafilter's front page was no place for the discussion point that this post was, some of the resulting responses were somewhat extreme.
In fact, it certainly puts me off wanting to posting anything whatsoever (I'm yet to make my first post).
posted by nthdegx at 5:41 AM on September 9, 2002
Maybe if Matt wants to avoid getting overwhelmed with 9/11 posts in the next couple of days, why doesn't he put a link right at the top (one line or something) that says "Want to comment on the 1-year anniversary or media coverage about it? Do it here."
The link would then go to a single comment area where everyone can just pour out their feelings/thoughts/concerns/beliefs."
posted by grum@work at 5:50 AM on September 9, 2002
The link would then go to a single comment area where everyone can just pour out their feelings/thoughts/concerns/beliefs."
posted by grum@work at 5:50 AM on September 9, 2002
Thanks for the correction Irontom.
Woil made the pertinent comment that the absence of a link made the point more eloquently than any link.
The purpose of metafilter is not to 'make a point'. We can turn that post upside down and spin it all you want, it doesn't even come close to fitting the guidelines here. It's cut and dry.
In fact, it certainly puts me off wanting to posting anything whatsoever (I'm yet to make my first post).
If only more people felt that way. Seriously, people seem to post anything and everything on a whim more and more now. Being a little nervous should at least make you ask yourself if the link fits into metafilter's guidelines. Or at least make sure you actually have a link.
posted by justgary at 5:50 AM on September 9, 2002
Woil made the pertinent comment that the absence of a link made the point more eloquently than any link.
The purpose of metafilter is not to 'make a point'. We can turn that post upside down and spin it all you want, it doesn't even come close to fitting the guidelines here. It's cut and dry.
In fact, it certainly puts me off wanting to posting anything whatsoever (I'm yet to make my first post).
If only more people felt that way. Seriously, people seem to post anything and everything on a whim more and more now. Being a little nervous should at least make you ask yourself if the link fits into metafilter's guidelines. Or at least make sure you actually have a link.
posted by justgary at 5:50 AM on September 9, 2002
Metafilter is not living up to its name, with the glut of gratuitous and vapid 9/11 coverage that has appeared on the front page recently. I see wsg's post as an (admittedly minor) wake-up call to us all, whether it was meant that way or not.
MetaFilter is not strictly a discussion area or group therapy, topics must hinge on a link to something on the web.
I've been meaning to block the ability to post linkless posts for months and months but haven't gotten to it yet.
There are some great points here, and some work that needs to be done to the posting page to remind everyone that doesn't feel like reading before posting.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 5:57 AM on September 9, 2002
MetaFilter is not strictly a discussion area or group therapy, topics must hinge on a link to something on the web.
I've been meaning to block the ability to post linkless posts for months and months but haven't gotten to it yet.
There are some great points here, and some work that needs to be done to the posting page to remind everyone that doesn't feel like reading before posting.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 5:57 AM on September 9, 2002
Standing up for a basic foundational rule of the site is now considered to be mean?
(On preview what Matt and everyone above said)
posted by riffola at 6:00 AM on September 9, 2002
(On preview what Matt and everyone above said)
posted by riffola at 6:00 AM on September 9, 2002
must we rehash it again?
Well, I think we will have to again & again until people get the message & read the posting guidelines before posting.
I think wsg got the message oh, about the 4th comment in. But of course that shouldn't stop everyone from participating in the great new Metafilterian sport of dogpiling on the newbie. Heavens. I'm just surprised this one didn't produce the Fark-esque calls of fucknut, fuckknuckle, fuckwit, whatever. C'mon, guys, y'all are slipping here.
posted by snarkywench at 6:02 AM on September 9, 2002
Well, I think we will have to again & again until people get the message & read the posting guidelines before posting.
I think wsg got the message oh, about the 4th comment in. But of course that shouldn't stop everyone from participating in the great new Metafilterian sport of dogpiling on the newbie. Heavens. I'm just surprised this one didn't produce the Fark-esque calls of fucknut, fuckknuckle, fuckwit, whatever. C'mon, guys, y'all are slipping here.
posted by snarkywench at 6:02 AM on September 9, 2002
The purpose of metafilter is not to 'make a point'.
Ah, I see your... thinking. I assume you mean FPPs, because points are frequently made within comments.
As nthdegx points... uh, makes clear, it is disheartening to see such a well-intentioned post, particularly from a newbie, met with some of the aggressive responses that it has.
Although I now agree that wsg's post was inappropriate (according to the guidelines), I think that Matt should think carefully before imposing restrictions such as a necessary tag. It is refreshing to see the rules broken every once in a while, and a good learning experience for all involved. Didn't he say something along the lines of "Metafilter governs itself"?
posted by cogat at 6:12 AM on September 9, 2002
Ah, I see your... thinking. I assume you mean FPPs, because points are frequently made within comments.
As nthdegx points... uh, makes clear, it is disheartening to see such a well-intentioned post, particularly from a newbie, met with some of the aggressive responses that it has.
Although I now agree that wsg's post was inappropriate (according to the guidelines), I think that Matt should think carefully before imposing restrictions such as a necessary tag. It is refreshing to see the rules broken every once in a while, and a good learning experience for all involved. Didn't he say something along the lines of "Metafilter governs itself"?
posted by cogat at 6:12 AM on September 9, 2002
The great new sport on MetaFilter is reflexively defending newbies regardless of whether they deserve it. Dogpiling them has been our favorite pastime for years.
posted by rcade at 6:15 AM on September 9, 2002
posted by rcade at 6:15 AM on September 9, 2002
Ah... I wanted to type the html tag for a link. < / a>
posted by cogat at 6:16 AM on September 9, 2002
posted by cogat at 6:16 AM on September 9, 2002
Cogat: Your <A> tag freaked out the site. You gotta be careful using real < and > characters (I used the entity references for those characters instead).
posted by rcade at 6:18 AM on September 9, 2002
posted by rcade at 6:18 AM on September 9, 2002
In fact, it certainly puts me off wanting to posting anything whatsoever (I'm yet to make my first post).
nthdegx
If only more people felt that way. Seriously, people seem to post anything and everything on a whim more and more now. Being a little nervous should at least make you ask yourself if the link fits into metafilter's guidelines.
justgary
I'm really not sure where to begin, except to say that you sound like some neighborhood association guy knocking on my front door to tell me my hedges are too high. Some of you folks should really get over yourselves. I happen to agree with nthdegx on this, for I too have skipped posting on several occasions even though my comments probably would have been a beneficial contribution to the discussion. Is Metafilter just another high school social clique that hisses at any newcommer that gets too close, or is anyone welcome to walk up to the bar, order a beer, and throw out a few opinions, because if this is a bar then you should be prepared to accept the occasional glass getting accidently tipped over.
posted by Beholder at 6:29 AM on September 9, 2002
nthdegx
If only more people felt that way. Seriously, people seem to post anything and everything on a whim more and more now. Being a little nervous should at least make you ask yourself if the link fits into metafilter's guidelines.
justgary
I'm really not sure where to begin, except to say that you sound like some neighborhood association guy knocking on my front door to tell me my hedges are too high. Some of you folks should really get over yourselves. I happen to agree with nthdegx on this, for I too have skipped posting on several occasions even though my comments probably would have been a beneficial contribution to the discussion. Is Metafilter just another high school social clique that hisses at any newcommer that gets too close, or is anyone welcome to walk up to the bar, order a beer, and throw out a few opinions, because if this is a bar then you should be prepared to accept the occasional glass getting accidently tipped over.
posted by Beholder at 6:29 AM on September 9, 2002
> I think that Matt should think carefully...
Do you now?
Dogpiling them has been our favorite pastime for years.
Quick, somebody point out a newbie for me! I'm in a dogpilin' mood!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:52 AM on September 9, 2002
Do you now?
Dogpiling them has been our favorite pastime for years.
Quick, somebody point out a newbie for me! I'm in a dogpilin' mood!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:52 AM on September 9, 2002
here here Beholder! No matter where you go there will always be those with supremacy issues. The best part is knowing they are the ones that have to live with it. :)
"Hey all you kids! Stay outta my yard! I'll shoot your ass, oh that makes me hard!" - np
posted by oh posey at 7:12 AM on September 9, 2002
"Hey all you kids! Stay outta my yard! I'll shoot your ass, oh that makes me hard!" - np
posted by oh posey at 7:12 AM on September 9, 2002
Beholder: Anyone is welcome to walk up to the bar, order a beer, and throw out a few opinions.
All that is asked is that people make sure that they've got good bar keep skills before they get behind the bar & start serving up drinks. Otherwise we all get too many badly mixed drinks, dirty glasses, too much head on the beer and unhappy drinkers.
I'm not sure on the smoking restrictions here tho'...
posted by i_cola at 7:20 AM on September 9, 2002
All that is asked is that people make sure that they've got good bar keep skills before they get behind the bar & start serving up drinks. Otherwise we all get too many badly mixed drinks, dirty glasses, too much head on the beer and unhappy drinkers.
I'm not sure on the smoking restrictions here tho'...
posted by i_cola at 7:20 AM on September 9, 2002
I'm really not sure where to begin, except to say that you sound like some neighborhood association guy knocking on my front door to tell me my hedges are too high.
If that bothers you, maybe you shouldn't have moved into a community with a neighborhood association. I live in a neighborhood that has a covenant regarding our landscaping and a bunch of other aggravating things, but that was my choice, so I don't have much grounds to bitch about it now (and, frankly, I'd rather be annoyed by the hedge police than live in a neighborhood where one eyesore can bring down the value of everyone else's home).
People who choose to post to MetaFilter's front page have to deal with a neighborhood association. It's the only way this place could possibly function when posting is open to all. I wish some of you new arrivals would take the time to understand the standards of the place before slagging them.
posted by rcade at 7:24 AM on September 9, 2002
If that bothers you, maybe you shouldn't have moved into a community with a neighborhood association. I live in a neighborhood that has a covenant regarding our landscaping and a bunch of other aggravating things, but that was my choice, so I don't have much grounds to bitch about it now (and, frankly, I'd rather be annoyed by the hedge police than live in a neighborhood where one eyesore can bring down the value of everyone else's home).
People who choose to post to MetaFilter's front page have to deal with a neighborhood association. It's the only way this place could possibly function when posting is open to all. I wish some of you new arrivals would take the time to understand the standards of the place before slagging them.
posted by rcade at 7:24 AM on September 9, 2002
>> I think that Matt should think carefully...
>Do you now?
Yep. Hmm... I don't mean to presume to tell him what to do. It's just an opinion, and not a very strongly-held one.
Rcade - I don't think us newbies (well, I'm new to posting, but have been lurking for a while) can complain about high standards (I'm all for them), but the method of enforcing them is often rude and savage, which is unpleasant to behold.
Perhaps the guidelines on the posting page should say "if you ignore these guidelines, you will be called a fuckwit, but we only meant it if you did it on purpose or through negligence." Or, perhaps create a small collection of pages to which the poster can be directed, that gently and constructively reprimands him or her for a particular failing, complete with links to appropriate MeTa threads.
posted by cogat at 7:54 AM on September 9, 2002
>Do you now?
Yep. Hmm... I don't mean to presume to tell him what to do. It's just an opinion, and not a very strongly-held one.
Rcade - I don't think us newbies (well, I'm new to posting, but have been lurking for a while) can complain about high standards (I'm all for them), but the method of enforcing them is often rude and savage, which is unpleasant to behold.
Perhaps the guidelines on the posting page should say "if you ignore these guidelines, you will be called a fuckwit, but we only meant it if you did it on purpose or through negligence." Or, perhaps create a small collection of pages to which the poster can be directed, that gently and constructively reprimands him or her for a particular failing, complete with links to appropriate MeTa threads.
posted by cogat at 7:54 AM on September 9, 2002
but the method of enforcing them is often rude and savage, which is unpleasant to behold.
Oh, come on. This one was about as gentle as possible.
posted by adampsyche at 7:58 AM on September 9, 2002
Oh, come on. This one was about as gentle as possible.
posted by adampsyche at 7:58 AM on September 9, 2002
often rude and savage, which is unpleasant to behold.
"What was the sensible thing to do? There was no Piggy to talk sense. There was no solemn assembly for debate nor dignity of the conch."
posted by rory at 8:23 AM on September 9, 2002
"What was the sensible thing to do? There was no Piggy to talk sense. There was no solemn assembly for debate nor dignity of the conch."
posted by rory at 8:23 AM on September 9, 2002
I concur that the post was inappropriate -- I'm sure he could have found an article out there that took his position.
However people were acting like a bunch of egotistical, whiny jerks in that thread. Some of you love to participate in a pile on because it makes you feel so big.
MetaTalk exists for a number of reasons, but one of those is so that you can discuss the merits of a particular thread. To me, the number of comments is a reflection of how popular a thread is. If you don't like it, or don't think it should be a post -- post a link in the thread to the MetaTalk dicussion and discuss it there.
There maybe should have been one or two comments, "linkless posts are inappropriate" and "hey, this is being discussed over here."
posted by jennak at 8:30 AM on September 9, 2002
However people were acting like a bunch of egotistical, whiny jerks in that thread. Some of you love to participate in a pile on because it makes you feel so big.
MetaTalk exists for a number of reasons, but one of those is so that you can discuss the merits of a particular thread. To me, the number of comments is a reflection of how popular a thread is. If you don't like it, or don't think it should be a post -- post a link in the thread to the MetaTalk dicussion and discuss it there.
There maybe should have been one or two comments, "linkless posts are inappropriate" and "hey, this is being discussed over here."
posted by jennak at 8:30 AM on September 9, 2002
No cogat - we'd call you a fuckwit for ignoring the guidelines even if you didn't do it on purpose. How hard is it? There are like three rules in this place. Post a link to something on the web. Make sure it hasn't been posted before. Make sure it's interesting.
nthdegx - In fact, it certainly puts me off wanting to posting anything whatsoever (I'm yet to make my first post).
You say that like it's a bad thing. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. I think you need more support for your position. What would you have posted if you weren't so disinclined by the angry words on your computer screen. Let us judge whether the community is really missing anything or if we actually saved ourselves another round of crap posts with all the angry vitriol that has bruised so many people's delicate sensibilities.
What is with all of this oh, you're all so mean garbage. It's not just directed at the new people. That's the way MeFi has been since long before I started coming here. Didn't any of you people read the site before signing up for member names?
posted by willnot at 8:36 AM on September 9, 2002
nthdegx - In fact, it certainly puts me off wanting to posting anything whatsoever (I'm yet to make my first post).
You say that like it's a bad thing. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. I think you need more support for your position. What would you have posted if you weren't so disinclined by the angry words on your computer screen. Let us judge whether the community is really missing anything or if we actually saved ourselves another round of crap posts with all the angry vitriol that has bruised so many people's delicate sensibilities.
What is with all of this oh, you're all so mean garbage. It's not just directed at the new people. That's the way MeFi has been since long before I started coming here. Didn't any of you people read the site before signing up for member names?
posted by willnot at 8:36 AM on September 9, 2002
no no, repeating what someone has already said in a thread just to see your name on the page is the true metafilter pasttime
posted by Mick at 8:45 AM on September 9, 2002
posted by Mick at 8:45 AM on September 9, 2002
no no, repeating what someone has already said in a thread just to see your name on the page is the true metafilter pasttime
posted by Mick at 8:45 AM on September 9, 2002
posted by Mick at 8:45 AM on September 9, 2002
jennak: the number of comments is a reflection of how popular a thread is
Popular != good. Apropos of which, has anyone read iconomy's blog lately?
jennak: There maybe should have been one or two comments, "linkless posts are inappropriate" and "hey, this is being discussed over here."
Sure. Problem is that people keep going after such comments are made, either because they're trying to salvage the thread or because they haven't read (or are fuckwittedly ignoring) the guidelines either or because they're just stupid. Interspersed with the piles-on in this particular thread, you had people carrying on as though the thread was valid, thinking that their noise is in fact signal when in reality the thread was doomed (as soon as Matt pressed the snooze bar for the third time) and it's all noise. (Note that no one, pre- or post-14K, has a monopoly on this practice.)
posted by mcwetboy at 8:47 AM on September 9, 2002
Popular != good. Apropos of which, has anyone read iconomy's blog lately?
jennak: There maybe should have been one or two comments, "linkless posts are inappropriate" and "hey, this is being discussed over here."
Sure. Problem is that people keep going after such comments are made, either because they're trying to salvage the thread or because they haven't read (or are fuckwittedly ignoring) the guidelines either or because they're just stupid. Interspersed with the piles-on in this particular thread, you had people carrying on as though the thread was valid, thinking that their noise is in fact signal when in reality the thread was doomed (as soon as Matt pressed the snooze bar for the third time) and it's all noise. (Note that no one, pre- or post-14K, has a monopoly on this practice.)
posted by mcwetboy at 8:47 AM on September 9, 2002
Sure. Problem is that people keep going after such comments are made, either because they're trying to salvage the thread or because they haven't read (or are fuckwittedly ignoring) the guidelines either or because they're just stupid.
Actually, if you read the deleted thread over at the Lofi page, there was only one comment in regards to the question asked by the poster. Everyone else was just there to say, "This isn't appropriate!" "This is appropriate!" "Is!" "Isn't!"
Unless you're talking about the actual content of the thread, bring it over to MeTa.
posted by jennak at 9:17 AM on September 9, 2002
Actually, if you read the deleted thread over at the Lofi page, there was only one comment in regards to the question asked by the poster. Everyone else was just there to say, "This isn't appropriate!" "This is appropriate!" "Is!" "Isn't!"
Unless you're talking about the actual content of the thread, bring it over to MeTa.
posted by jennak at 9:17 AM on September 9, 2002
For those of you interested in reading the "savagery" that is being discussed here. Asshats...
posted by evanizer at 9:31 AM on September 9, 2002
posted by evanizer at 9:31 AM on September 9, 2002
I happen to agree with nthdegx on this, for I too have skipped posting on several occasions even though my comments probably would have been a beneficial contribution to the discussion.
beholder: it sounds like you've mixed up posting (adding a thread to the front page) with commenting (adding a comment to a thread). i don't think anyone wants to discourage you from commenting -- by all means, comment, if you can make an interesting contribution, and even if you can't (like me) -- it's unlikely anyone's going to yell at you, or dogpile you over a comment, unless it's needlessly ad hominem or the like.
as for adding a thread (posting), well, it *is* advisable to wait a bit and make sure you've got a feel for the place -- posting to the front page is a bit more of a big deal than just making a comment.
and heck, there's no rush -- i've been here a year already and have never posted -- and hey, i'm sure there's tons of folks who participate on a regular basis and don't really post either. that's fine. we've got tons of posts to work with already.
welcome to mefi, btw.
posted by fishfucker at 10:22 AM on September 9, 2002
beholder: it sounds like you've mixed up posting (adding a thread to the front page) with commenting (adding a comment to a thread). i don't think anyone wants to discourage you from commenting -- by all means, comment, if you can make an interesting contribution, and even if you can't (like me) -- it's unlikely anyone's going to yell at you, or dogpile you over a comment, unless it's needlessly ad hominem or the like.
as for adding a thread (posting), well, it *is* advisable to wait a bit and make sure you've got a feel for the place -- posting to the front page is a bit more of a big deal than just making a comment.
and heck, there's no rush -- i've been here a year already and have never posted -- and hey, i'm sure there's tons of folks who participate on a regular basis and don't really post either. that's fine. we've got tons of posts to work with already.
welcome to mefi, btw.
posted by fishfucker at 10:22 AM on September 9, 2002
My name is NOT Jenna!!!! Sorry. I've begun to really detest the name thanks to a certain Bush twin.
posted by jennak at 11:31 AM on September 9, 2002
posted by jennak at 11:31 AM on September 9, 2002
cogat - Thanks for mentioning what I said in your post. I kinda wish that there were a way to not completely remove the posts altogether, and just take them off the front page, so all of the comments would be saved... It might make meta talk more accurate.
-Will
posted by woil at 11:48 AM on September 9, 2002
-Will
posted by woil at 11:48 AM on September 9, 2002
ughm woil (?) or here if you prefer.
Oh, and Jenna - have another drink or something. You seem tense (sorry - couldn't resist).
posted by willnot at 11:57 AM on September 9, 2002
Oh, and Jenna - have another drink or something. You seem tense (sorry - couldn't resist).
posted by willnot at 11:57 AM on September 9, 2002
You say that like it's a bad thing. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. I think you need more support for your position. What would you have posted if you weren't so disinclined by the angry words on your computer screen. Let us judge whether the community is really missing anything or if we actually saved ourselves another round of crap posts with all the angry vitriol that has bruised so many people's delicate sensibilities.
willnot -
To add some clarification: the aggressive response that met this clearly inappropriate post is not the only thing that has prevented me posting, or even the main reason. My point was that such a response would make me think twice about posting when I did have something to offer. I didn't say that I have been put off posting in the past. I understand the implications of posting to the front page.
As snarkywench pointed out, it was made clear that the post was inappropriate very early on. Had any of the subsequent responses registered as either witty, funny or clever then fine, but most of the rebukes were tantamount to laughing at the silly twat that didn't include a link.
As for judging the quality of what I deem suitable posting material - you'll just have to wait until I make a post, I guess ;) So yeah, I haven't been a member that long, but I have been reading metafilter regularly for quite a long time, and only felt compelled to join when there were points I was desperate to make to the odd conversation that I felt would genuinely add something. Quite when newbie status ends I am not sure, but I am fairly certain you don't have the monopoly on saying what constitutes a good post and what doesn't.
posted by nthdegx at 2:35 PM on September 9, 2002
willnot -
To add some clarification: the aggressive response that met this clearly inappropriate post is not the only thing that has prevented me posting, or even the main reason. My point was that such a response would make me think twice about posting when I did have something to offer. I didn't say that I have been put off posting in the past. I understand the implications of posting to the front page.
As snarkywench pointed out, it was made clear that the post was inappropriate very early on. Had any of the subsequent responses registered as either witty, funny or clever then fine, but most of the rebukes were tantamount to laughing at the silly twat that didn't include a link.
As for judging the quality of what I deem suitable posting material - you'll just have to wait until I make a post, I guess ;) So yeah, I haven't been a member that long, but I have been reading metafilter regularly for quite a long time, and only felt compelled to join when there were points I was desperate to make to the odd conversation that I felt would genuinely add something. Quite when newbie status ends I am not sure, but I am fairly certain you don't have the monopoly on saying what constitutes a good post and what doesn't.
posted by nthdegx at 2:35 PM on September 9, 2002
I think you may have missed my point. Your argument seemed to be built along the lines of X has led to Y. Because Y is bad, then X is bad.
That is: Abusive Behavior has Led to less inclination to post. Because we want people to post then abusive behavior is bad.
But, that is only true if we accept that Y is bad. If Y is good, then X is good as well.
If people are so scared to post, that they only post when they have something spectacular to post, then abusive behavior is good for MeFi. It's only a "problem" if we are losing good posts (and given recent quantity of posts I would argue more good posts than bad posts by a large factor) as a result.
So, to support the implied argument that we've lost good posts because of bad behavior, then you would need to provide examples of the good posts we've lost. The community, and not "just me" can then judge whether your argument holds any water.
posted by willnot at 3:13 PM on September 9, 2002
That is: Abusive Behavior has Led to less inclination to post. Because we want people to post then abusive behavior is bad.
But, that is only true if we accept that Y is bad. If Y is good, then X is good as well.
If people are so scared to post, that they only post when they have something spectacular to post, then abusive behavior is good for MeFi. It's only a "problem" if we are losing good posts (and given recent quantity of posts I would argue more good posts than bad posts by a large factor) as a result.
So, to support the implied argument that we've lost good posts because of bad behavior, then you would need to provide examples of the good posts we've lost. The community, and not "just me" can then judge whether your argument holds any water.
posted by willnot at 3:13 PM on September 9, 2002
Closure:
Willnot, my first post has been made so you are welcome to judge for yourself. I'd be interested to hear.
Obviously the odds of you seeing this, now, are slim, but it seemed the only appropriate place - and alas your profile doesn't have an email address (probably to avoid pedants like me dragging up five-day-old s*** and stuffing it into your inbox;)
Oh well.
posted by nthdegx at 2:46 PM on September 14, 2002
Willnot, my first post has been made so you are welcome to judge for yourself. I'd be interested to hear.
Obviously the odds of you seeing this, now, are slim, but it seemed the only appropriate place - and alas your profile doesn't have an email address (probably to avoid pedants like me dragging up five-day-old s*** and stuffing it into your inbox;)
Oh well.
posted by nthdegx at 2:46 PM on September 14, 2002
« Older This post is a total self link | I have no idea what I am clicking on and I don't... Newer »
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by quonsar at 4:28 AM on September 9, 2002