Are you a MeFi Lefty or a MeFi Righty? September 15, 2002 4:49 PM Subscribe
Are you a MeFi Lefty or a MeFi Righty? I honestly don't get what comments like this one are getting at, or what they would prefer to see happen here. The lack of specificity in most of these complaints doesn't help. I see good and bad arguments getting called out regularly, regardless of where they fall on the political spectrum. What am I missing?
i'm so far right you have to reach around the left side to find me.
posted by quonsar at 5:16 PM on September 15, 2002
posted by quonsar at 5:16 PM on September 15, 2002
The fact that you honestly don't get what the comment is getting at is the very point of the comment. 100% of the posts on Metafilter with Bush and/or Cheney as the subject are not just about disagreements with administration policy, but statements about the evil nature of the administration. 90% of the responses are in agreement with the main post. With such statistics, why are there so many "Bush/Cheney are fucking the world" posts? Unless it's an exercise in intellectual masturbation, it really doesn't make much sense to have that much similar noise about the topic. I personally don't see that it's worth complaining about (I personally still come to metafilter looking for links to interesting places on the web, silly me), and the proper place to make the complaint is here in metatalk. But it is a valid complaint.
Note: I detest the current administration, but I detest those that claim it evil just as much as I detested those that evangelized the evilness of the previous administration. Small minds are small minds whether they be left or right leaning. Metafilter just isn't the appropriate forum for scoring points with your buddies on political punditry.
posted by dchase at 5:26 PM on September 15, 2002
Note: I detest the current administration, but I detest those that claim it evil just as much as I detested those that evangelized the evilness of the previous administration. Small minds are small minds whether they be left or right leaning. Metafilter just isn't the appropriate forum for scoring points with your buddies on political punditry.
posted by dchase at 5:26 PM on September 15, 2002
My inclination when I hear the straw man "left-right conservatives-liberals" arguments is to ask "Who's getting paid here? Or who's decided that they're being exploited?" When that tired ol' straw man gets hauled out, it's often under one of these two circumstances.
Would sure be nice if we could move past blame assignment and complaint, and focus more on filtering out the high quality web-based materials for each other!
posted by sheauga at 5:40 PM on September 15, 2002
Would sure be nice if we could move past blame assignment and complaint, and focus more on filtering out the high quality web-based materials for each other!
posted by sheauga at 5:40 PM on September 15, 2002
100% of the posts on Metafilter with Bush and/or Cheney as the subject are not just about disagreements with administration policy, but statements about the evil nature of the administration.
Sheesh. 100 percent?
posted by rcade at 5:53 PM on September 15, 2002
Sheesh. 100 percent?
posted by rcade at 5:53 PM on September 15, 2002
The fact that you honestly don't get what the comment is getting at is the very point of the comment.
I know how to recognize editorializing, dchase, thanks. But my point is it's there on both sides. And if you want to see more thoughtful posts about Cheney on the front page, you can always, you know, post them. If you're waiting for Ty Webb to do it for you, don't hold your breath. Unless you're suggesting some sort of stricter "balance" rule for MeFi, I'm not sure how you can object to members finding and posting links they find interesting.
100% of the posts on Metafilter with Bush and/or Cheney as the subject are not just about disagreements with administration policy, but statements about the evil nature of the administration. 90% of the responses are in agreement with the main post.
See, this is exactly what I mean. We'll move further, dchase, if we use specific examples instead of stats we make up off the top of our heads. When I read a thread like the recent one about Mandela criticisizing Bush, potentially an inflammatory subject, I don't see your 90% agreement at all. Instead, I see a sharp debate, relatively few insults (at least in the first half of the thread) and good points made on both sides. I do think unnecessary editorializing in front page posts -- here and here, imho -- is an issue we should talk about. I'd love to see it go away, actually. But letting a quote speak for you, like f_&_m does here, seems legit to me.
However, I can perhaps see why a conservative might object to the phrasing here, although I'm not certain. Maybe we can have a more fruitful discussion if the conservatives who see a problem post a few examples of their own.
posted by mediareport at 6:17 PM on September 15, 2002
I know how to recognize editorializing, dchase, thanks. But my point is it's there on both sides. And if you want to see more thoughtful posts about Cheney on the front page, you can always, you know, post them. If you're waiting for Ty Webb to do it for you, don't hold your breath. Unless you're suggesting some sort of stricter "balance" rule for MeFi, I'm not sure how you can object to members finding and posting links they find interesting.
100% of the posts on Metafilter with Bush and/or Cheney as the subject are not just about disagreements with administration policy, but statements about the evil nature of the administration. 90% of the responses are in agreement with the main post.
See, this is exactly what I mean. We'll move further, dchase, if we use specific examples instead of stats we make up off the top of our heads. When I read a thread like the recent one about Mandela criticisizing Bush, potentially an inflammatory subject, I don't see your 90% agreement at all. Instead, I see a sharp debate, relatively few insults (at least in the first half of the thread) and good points made on both sides. I do think unnecessary editorializing in front page posts -- here and here, imho -- is an issue we should talk about. I'd love to see it go away, actually. But letting a quote speak for you, like f_&_m does here, seems legit to me.
However, I can perhaps see why a conservative might object to the phrasing here, although I'm not certain. Maybe we can have a more fruitful discussion if the conservatives who see a problem post a few examples of their own.
posted by mediareport at 6:17 PM on September 15, 2002
Some people mistakenly think Metafilter is a political blog. At its best, it certainly isn't.
The majority of MetaFilter's active members are also, if we must classify, pretty liberal/left so, as a result, MetaFilter ends up having a liberal political slant, which is fine: the 'Filter is not supposed to be unbiased and unslanted, since its very fiber is discussion by individuals. But the proble arises (and I don't think it's just a MetaFilter problem) in the extremity of polarization. The sum total of most political discussions is either "If you're liberal, you must believe this, this and this. If you don't believe this, this and this, you're obviously a conservative, thus you must believe so and so and so, and you must be just like Pat Buchanan. So SHUT UP, EVIL PIG!" This identity-branding and soundbyte, superficial political thought is endemic all over the world right now, and really frustrates those of us who try to formulate our beliefs issue by issue and not be indoctrinated into a party line. I get attacked here pretty frequently as a "conservative", so to some extent I play that role in order to make things easier, but it really gnaws at me that I have to accept any sort of label and all of its baggage. Sure, I hold what might be seen as philosophically conservative beliefs on some topics, and I hold wildly 'liberal' beliefs on others. But, again, everything gets polarised, so the presence of the conservative beliefs trumps the liberal ones, and I become one of the 'token conservatives'. If I posted on Free Republic, the presence of my liberal beliefs would certainly trump my conservative ones, and I'd be the resident liberal fag. It's sooooo stupid, but what can we do? There will always be a few dopes who are just not smart enough or independant thinkers enough to arrive at their own political beliefs, and they'll post here and start flame wars, everyone will get angry and defensive and so on and so on ad infinitum. Those of us who have actual 'dissenting' viewpoints will become weary and bitter from the constant attacks and meanness, and we'll leave. Thus having any sort of divergent viewpoint will be rarer and rarer and considered "trolling", and the place will become more and more of a snooze.
Another problem is that many posters use their beliefs to taunt and mock rather than to foster discussion, so it ends up provoking anyone who won't polarize themselves, and starts yet another flamewar.
I wish we could all be iconoclasts and see that belief is not a binary system, but often spreads out in all directions, not just left and right.
Oh, and for the record, I did not vote for Bush in the last election, I'm a registered Democrat, and I frequently contribute to GLAAD, AMFAR and the ASPCA. That doesn't mean that I accept any of the party lines of these organizations completely, nor should it. It also doesn't mean that I don't support President Bush when he does things right. What has happened to him is what happened to Clinton in some conservative circles: no matter what the man did (and he did many, many smart things in addition to the monumentally stupid ones), he'd be attacked. Politics became (or perhaps always been) about personal vendetta rather than about politics.
posted by evanizer at 6:20 PM on September 15, 2002
The majority of MetaFilter's active members are also, if we must classify, pretty liberal/left so, as a result, MetaFilter ends up having a liberal political slant, which is fine: the 'Filter is not supposed to be unbiased and unslanted, since its very fiber is discussion by individuals. But the proble arises (and I don't think it's just a MetaFilter problem) in the extremity of polarization. The sum total of most political discussions is either "If you're liberal, you must believe this, this and this. If you don't believe this, this and this, you're obviously a conservative, thus you must believe so and so and so, and you must be just like Pat Buchanan. So SHUT UP, EVIL PIG!" This identity-branding and soundbyte, superficial political thought is endemic all over the world right now, and really frustrates those of us who try to formulate our beliefs issue by issue and not be indoctrinated into a party line. I get attacked here pretty frequently as a "conservative", so to some extent I play that role in order to make things easier, but it really gnaws at me that I have to accept any sort of label and all of its baggage. Sure, I hold what might be seen as philosophically conservative beliefs on some topics, and I hold wildly 'liberal' beliefs on others. But, again, everything gets polarised, so the presence of the conservative beliefs trumps the liberal ones, and I become one of the 'token conservatives'. If I posted on Free Republic, the presence of my liberal beliefs would certainly trump my conservative ones, and I'd be the resident liberal fag. It's sooooo stupid, but what can we do? There will always be a few dopes who are just not smart enough or independant thinkers enough to arrive at their own political beliefs, and they'll post here and start flame wars, everyone will get angry and defensive and so on and so on ad infinitum. Those of us who have actual 'dissenting' viewpoints will become weary and bitter from the constant attacks and meanness, and we'll leave. Thus having any sort of divergent viewpoint will be rarer and rarer and considered "trolling", and the place will become more and more of a snooze.
Another problem is that many posters use their beliefs to taunt and mock rather than to foster discussion, so it ends up provoking anyone who won't polarize themselves, and starts yet another flamewar.
I wish we could all be iconoclasts and see that belief is not a binary system, but often spreads out in all directions, not just left and right.
Oh, and for the record, I did not vote for Bush in the last election, I'm a registered Democrat, and I frequently contribute to GLAAD, AMFAR and the ASPCA. That doesn't mean that I accept any of the party lines of these organizations completely, nor should it. It also doesn't mean that I don't support President Bush when he does things right. What has happened to him is what happened to Clinton in some conservative circles: no matter what the man did (and he did many, many smart things in addition to the monumentally stupid ones), he'd be attacked. Politics became (or perhaps always been) about personal vendetta rather than about politics.
posted by evanizer at 6:20 PM on September 15, 2002
Are you a MeFi Lefty or a MeFi Righty?
Here on MeFi, I go both ways, darling.
~winks licentiously~
posted by jonmc at 6:21 PM on September 15, 2002
Here on MeFi, I go both ways, darling.
~winks licentiously~
posted by jonmc at 6:21 PM on September 15, 2002
I'm not sure that affiliation-tagging is always fixed, as my concept of the party-political continuum echoes the theory of sexuality proposed [by Kinsey, I think]: 'There are no conservative people, only conservative acts'. (",)
I have only ever actively campaigned for one Party , only ever leafletted for one other Party and never ever considered voting for these guys. But when the only way to kick him out is to vote [ugh!] Tory, my only question is "How long do I have to hold my nose for?"
posted by dash_slot- at 6:34 PM on September 15, 2002
I have only ever actively campaigned for one Party , only ever leafletted for one other Party and never ever considered voting for these guys. But when the only way to kick him out is to vote [ugh!] Tory, my only question is "How long do I have to hold my nose for?"
posted by dash_slot- at 6:34 PM on September 15, 2002
offtopic
And to speak about one of your examples, mediareport, fold_and_mutilate infuriates me not as much for the substance of his politics, but for his absolutely myopic focus on the narrowest, most dogmatic adherence to his specific doctrine. There is no ideological flexibility, there are no gradient tones. There is either saint or sinner on every issue, and often he plays the lone saint chastising us roiling in the pit of sinners. It's condescending, inflammatory and just plain boring sometimes, an ideological puritanism that outstrips almost any that I have seen. It's also usually a big "fuck you" to the community, since by its very nature it precludes discussion that is anything other than defense or submission. It's also cold, inhuman, and kind of creepy. You could count the unpreachy, friendly, uneditorialized discussion-oriented posts and comments by foldy on one hand; most of them are like the delivery from On High of the Word Of God unto the lowest of the earth, and it really chaftes those of us who obstain from religion. There is almost no other active poster who so deifantly and single mindedly skirts the edge of acceptable behavior here, and is so mechanistically predictable, which is why I once, early on in my membership here, I humourously postulated that he was actually a rejoinderbot.
I don't mind talking about him, since he probably loves it.
/off-topic
posted by evanizer at 6:36 PM on September 15, 2002
And to speak about one of your examples, mediareport, fold_and_mutilate infuriates me not as much for the substance of his politics, but for his absolutely myopic focus on the narrowest, most dogmatic adherence to his specific doctrine. There is no ideological flexibility, there are no gradient tones. There is either saint or sinner on every issue, and often he plays the lone saint chastising us roiling in the pit of sinners. It's condescending, inflammatory and just plain boring sometimes, an ideological puritanism that outstrips almost any that I have seen. It's also usually a big "fuck you" to the community, since by its very nature it precludes discussion that is anything other than defense or submission. It's also cold, inhuman, and kind of creepy. You could count the unpreachy, friendly, uneditorialized discussion-oriented posts and comments by foldy on one hand; most of them are like the delivery from On High of the Word Of God unto the lowest of the earth, and it really chaftes those of us who obstain from religion. There is almost no other active poster who so deifantly and single mindedly skirts the edge of acceptable behavior here, and is so mechanistically predictable, which is why I once, early on in my membership here, I humourously postulated that he was actually a rejoinderbot.
I don't mind talking about him, since he probably loves it.
/off-topic
posted by evanizer at 6:36 PM on September 15, 2002
Some people mistakenly think Metafilter is a political blog. At its best, it certainly isn't.
Ev, this right here, ignoring everything else you just said, is the cause of and solution to the problem. Any problems of political bias are merely co-symptomatic of a bigger problem, which is that 3/4ths of the front page posts are just links to newspaper articles about current events. They shouldn't be.
posted by Hildago at 6:51 PM on September 15, 2002
Ev, this right here, ignoring everything else you just said, is the cause of and solution to the problem. Any problems of political bias are merely co-symptomatic of a bigger problem, which is that 3/4ths of the front page posts are just links to newspaper articles about current events. They shouldn't be.
posted by Hildago at 6:51 PM on September 15, 2002
...and then there was a big fat hole in the sky and god said, "huh, yeah, what-ever." And the big fat world was all happy and glad sometimes and everyone smiled, but at other times the world was really really sad and some people were crying.
posted by poopy at 6:53 PM on September 15, 2002
posted by poopy at 6:53 PM on September 15, 2002
dchase : I detest those that claim it evil just as much as I detested those that evangelized the evilness of the previous administration.
So you detest me with a special superdoubleextra-powerful disdain for claiming that you've had nothing but evil running the country for decades, then, I guess, huh?
Well, except maybe Jimmy. He seemed so nice.
Seriously, my friend, if you detest people because of what they believe politically, you might need to loosen your tie a bit and grab a delicious beverage, sit down and just have a chat, you know?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:53 PM on September 15, 2002
So you detest me with a special superdoubleextra-powerful disdain for claiming that you've had nothing but evil running the country for decades, then, I guess, huh?
Well, except maybe Jimmy. He seemed so nice.
Seriously, my friend, if you detest people because of what they believe politically, you might need to loosen your tie a bit and grab a delicious beverage, sit down and just have a chat, you know?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:53 PM on September 15, 2002
Seriously, my friend, if you detest people because of what they believe politically, you might need to loosen your tie a bit and grab a delicious beverage, sit down and just have a chat, you know?
More politics disguised as, 'hey, i love you bro, but you're all fucked up'
Sorry stav, you're smooth, but i have a hard time believing you saying the same thing if dchase's statement were confirming your own political beliefs:
I detest those that claim it holy just as much as I detested those that demonized the righteousness of the previous administration.
Everyone has an agenda. Let's not fool ourselves.
posted by poopy at 7:23 PM on September 15, 2002
More politics disguised as, 'hey, i love you bro, but you're all fucked up'
Sorry stav, you're smooth, but i have a hard time believing you saying the same thing if dchase's statement were confirming your own political beliefs:
I detest those that claim it holy just as much as I detested those that demonized the righteousness of the previous administration.
Everyone has an agenda. Let's not fool ourselves.
posted by poopy at 7:23 PM on September 15, 2002
Everyone has an agenda.
I sure as hell don't. I firmly believe that who's in office affects my life not one iota. As a very wise man once said, "Meet the New Boss, Same as The Old Boss"
posted by jonmc at 7:44 PM on September 15, 2002
I sure as hell don't. I firmly believe that who's in office affects my life not one iota. As a very wise man once said, "Meet the New Boss, Same as The Old Boss"
posted by jonmc at 7:44 PM on September 15, 2002
Wrong, poopy. What thoughts I do have of a political nature are often diametrically opposed to those of dhartung, or evanizer, or MidasMulligan or the long-gone Steven Den Beste, to name just a few of the more high-profile MeFites who would probably be content to have their beliefs characterized as conservative or right-leaning.
Nonetheless though, as I've said before, I am happy to read what they have to say, because inflammatory as it is sometimes, when I'm in a mood less than fully gruntled, it is often well-written, well-argued or at least amusingly presented. I can learn from these people with whom I disagree, at least as much as I can in a circle-jerk with those with my own political leanings. If I can sit down over a few drinks in Real Life and argue passionately with people who hold differing views to my own, then get up from the table still friends, why should I not be able to do it here?
Believe what you wish about my 'smoothness,' poopy. I'm just here to have some fun, learn a few things, get some cool linkage, talk some shit with my virtual pals. No agenda.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:53 PM on September 15, 2002
Nonetheless though, as I've said before, I am happy to read what they have to say, because inflammatory as it is sometimes, when I'm in a mood less than fully gruntled, it is often well-written, well-argued or at least amusingly presented. I can learn from these people with whom I disagree, at least as much as I can in a circle-jerk with those with my own political leanings. If I can sit down over a few drinks in Real Life and argue passionately with people who hold differing views to my own, then get up from the table still friends, why should I not be able to do it here?
Believe what you wish about my 'smoothness,' poopy. I'm just here to have some fun, learn a few things, get some cool linkage, talk some shit with my virtual pals. No agenda.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:53 PM on September 15, 2002
My two cents:
1) This post would have been important even if it were about a Liberal Democratic president/cabinet (/cabal?) If the document in question is real, it should raise the hackles of any conservative Republican with a brain and a conscience just as quickly as it disturbs the 'liberals."
2) MetaFilter is an intelligent place where posted info garners intelligent debate. If such a "meeting of the minds" attracts much more political "liberals" than "conservatives," is it really the fault of the "liberals"?
Okay, 3 cents:
3) I'm sure I'm labelled a liberal, but all of my convictions stem from the simple fact that I have a heart, a conscience, and an informed mind. Besides, I'm a Constitutional Conservative. What staunch supporter of W Bush can possibly be a Constitutional Conservative? So what do all the labels mean, anyway?
posted by Shane at 7:59 PM on September 15, 2002
1) This post would have been important even if it were about a Liberal Democratic president/cabinet (/cabal?) If the document in question is real, it should raise the hackles of any conservative Republican with a brain and a conscience just as quickly as it disturbs the 'liberals."
2) MetaFilter is an intelligent place where posted info garners intelligent debate. If such a "meeting of the minds" attracts much more political "liberals" than "conservatives," is it really the fault of the "liberals"?
Okay, 3 cents:
3) I'm sure I'm labelled a liberal, but all of my convictions stem from the simple fact that I have a heart, a conscience, and an informed mind. Besides, I'm a Constitutional Conservative. What staunch supporter of W Bush can possibly be a Constitutional Conservative? So what do all the labels mean, anyway?
posted by Shane at 7:59 PM on September 15, 2002
And if you want to see more thoughtful posts about Cheney on the front page, you can always, you know, post them
Sorry, I meant to express that I wanted to see less posts about Cheney et al on the front page, be they thoughtful or not. Thankfully Evanizer and Hildago caught my drift but made the point much more succinctly than I. I was always under the impression that Metafilter was not a political discussion blog, but a, well, meta filter for stuff on the web. As such, I never felt a responsibility (or practical ability) to post thoughtful posts about any particular political issue of the day, and your link to my posting history clearly illustrates that.
STWC: detest is perhaps too strong a word and definitely made the statement sound like a personal attack against people with a particular opinion, which was not the intent, so apologies on that. But "Am sick of the redundant self referential I-can't-believe-anyone-can-not-agree-with-me-therefore-I must-be-right-so-you-must-be-wrong hyperbole" were just too many words to type on a Sunday evening :) It's the hyperbole that bothers, not the people behind it. I agree, loosening the tie a bit, grabbing a delicious beverage and sitting down to just have a chat is just the thing to do around here. That was actually a subtext of the point I was trying to make, but again someone else (you) put it much more eloquently than I.
posted by dchase at 8:08 PM on September 15, 2002
Sorry, I meant to express that I wanted to see less posts about Cheney et al on the front page, be they thoughtful or not. Thankfully Evanizer and Hildago caught my drift but made the point much more succinctly than I. I was always under the impression that Metafilter was not a political discussion blog, but a, well, meta filter for stuff on the web. As such, I never felt a responsibility (or practical ability) to post thoughtful posts about any particular political issue of the day, and your link to my posting history clearly illustrates that.
STWC: detest is perhaps too strong a word and definitely made the statement sound like a personal attack against people with a particular opinion, which was not the intent, so apologies on that. But "Am sick of the redundant self referential I-can't-believe-anyone-can-not-agree-with-me-therefore-I must-be-right-so-you-must-be-wrong hyperbole" were just too many words to type on a Sunday evening :) It's the hyperbole that bothers, not the people behind it. I agree, loosening the tie a bit, grabbing a delicious beverage and sitting down to just have a chat is just the thing to do around here. That was actually a subtext of the point I was trying to make, but again someone else (you) put it much more eloquently than I.
posted by dchase at 8:08 PM on September 15, 2002
anyone whom feels they need to use terms like 'left' or 'right' to describe politics, either in terms of themselves are others, are unimaginative wastes of mewling flesh, and should do the world a favour and kill themselves the next time they're beating off to their favourite rush limbaugh broadcast.
kthx.
posted by jcterminal at 9:42 PM on September 15, 2002
kthx.
posted by jcterminal at 9:42 PM on September 15, 2002
Okay, I've altered my profile (scroll down a bit). I would encourage everyone to do the same, and that may take care of a lot of the issues here, no?
yes, the tongue is placed firmly against the cheek
posted by Ufez Jones at 10:14 PM on September 15, 2002
yes, the tongue is placed firmly against the cheek
posted by Ufez Jones at 10:14 PM on September 15, 2002
I may have inadevertantly started this with a (somewhat rhetorical) question about the perpetual barrage of "Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/US=evil" posts that appear very nearly daily on MeFi. I was actually genuinely wondering whether it wasn't getting sorta boring. The model seems always the same ... a Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/US=evil FPP, followed by a few folks shaking heads and saying "tsk, tsk, yeppers, that certainly is further evidence ...", an occasional post that questions the orthodoxy and hence unleashes the furies, and then a thread three times as long that buries the post. Most of these FPP's really are trolls - in that they are useless if everyone agrees, and only wind up even being vaguely interesting if someone is foolish enough assert that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/US is only 90% evil, instead of the commonly accepted 98%-99%.
Now and then someone will make a comment like mine about the sort of dramatically leftward leanings of MeFi, which is followed by a number of the lefties quite often arguing that there is no such leaning, and one or two righties saying there is a leftward lean, but (essentially) they just live with it (reactions that are themselves kind of telling - as if there was anything even remotely resembling balance on MeFi, one would expect to see equal amounts of complaints about left leaning vs. right leaning).
However, I certainly wasn't making any argument to say anything ought to be stopped - or any rules or guidelines laid down.
posted by MidasMulligan at 10:46 PM on September 15, 2002
Now and then someone will make a comment like mine about the sort of dramatically leftward leanings of MeFi, which is followed by a number of the lefties quite often arguing that there is no such leaning, and one or two righties saying there is a leftward lean, but (essentially) they just live with it (reactions that are themselves kind of telling - as if there was anything even remotely resembling balance on MeFi, one would expect to see equal amounts of complaints about left leaning vs. right leaning).
However, I certainly wasn't making any argument to say anything ought to be stopped - or any rules or guidelines laid down.
posted by MidasMulligan at 10:46 PM on September 15, 2002
Any problems of political bias are merely co-symptomatic of a bigger problem, which is that 3/4ths of the front page posts are just links to newspaper articles about current events. They shouldn't be.
Huh? Can you explain your position, please? This is a community weblog, right? And many weblogs talk about current events, right? So what's the problem?
A plain ol' link to Bush Creates Department of Ice Cream isn't really discussion worthy, as it's merely a link and without some kind of discussion, the thread will quickly deteriorate into a Repubs vs. Dems debate. But if someone posed a good question ("Is this because of all the money he received from Dairy Farmers of America?"), then that's cool.
There's only so many non-current event stuff out there ("Hey, have you seen this vibrating Hello Kitty?"), and there's a lot of interesting news/culture/politics/phenomenon in the world. I think current news probably only makes up about 40-50% of Metafilter.
posted by jennak at 11:56 PM on September 15, 2002
Huh? Can you explain your position, please? This is a community weblog, right? And many weblogs talk about current events, right? So what's the problem?
A plain ol' link to Bush Creates Department of Ice Cream isn't really discussion worthy, as it's merely a link and without some kind of discussion, the thread will quickly deteriorate into a Repubs vs. Dems debate. But if someone posed a good question ("Is this because of all the money he received from Dairy Farmers of America?"), then that's cool.
There's only so many non-current event stuff out there ("Hey, have you seen this vibrating Hello Kitty?"), and there's a lot of interesting news/culture/politics/phenomenon in the world. I think current news probably only makes up about 40-50% of Metafilter.
posted by jennak at 11:56 PM on September 15, 2002
Well, ok, we can quibble about the percentage of news and non-news stories on the front page (although I'd stick with my rough guestimate), but the fact that there aren't as many interesting non current-event links doesn't mean we have to fill our quota with
a) non-interesting non current-events links, or
b) current events links of any level of quality
Because we have no quota to fill. No one is forcing anyone to post anything. Likewise, you might say, no one is forcing anyone to read anything they don't like either. The difference, of course, is that the guidelines set the burden of proof (if you will) on the poster, since its their job to find something "most people haven't seen... before". In my mind, this pretty much removes most current events links, except for those rare few that will probably not be covered on CNN, MSNBC, FOX, Headline News, or any of the Networks. Those are fine, but a link to, say, an article that announces somebody will hold a press conference the following day doesn't fit the criteria, the way I see them.
They're also urged to post something that will start a debate. It's not expressed, but I think the tacit expectation here is that it will start a good debate, rather than just the same old partisan bickering, which is what (let's face it) most current events links in the last year (if not since the invention of the hyperlink) have done.
But that's really secondary. When it comes down to it, I'm just sick of seeing this glut of unnecessary posts about anything related to the Bush presidency, missing white children, et cetera. I think a lot of people are.
posted by Hildago at 12:39 AM on September 16, 2002
a) non-interesting non current-events links, or
b) current events links of any level of quality
Because we have no quota to fill. No one is forcing anyone to post anything. Likewise, you might say, no one is forcing anyone to read anything they don't like either. The difference, of course, is that the guidelines set the burden of proof (if you will) on the poster, since its their job to find something "most people haven't seen... before". In my mind, this pretty much removes most current events links, except for those rare few that will probably not be covered on CNN, MSNBC, FOX, Headline News, or any of the Networks. Those are fine, but a link to, say, an article that announces somebody will hold a press conference the following day doesn't fit the criteria, the way I see them.
They're also urged to post something that will start a debate. It's not expressed, but I think the tacit expectation here is that it will start a good debate, rather than just the same old partisan bickering, which is what (let's face it) most current events links in the last year (if not since the invention of the hyperlink) have done.
But that's really secondary. When it comes down to it, I'm just sick of seeing this glut of unnecessary posts about anything related to the Bush presidency, missing white children, et cetera. I think a lot of people are.
posted by Hildago at 12:39 AM on September 16, 2002
Everyone has an agenda. Let's not fool ourselves.
Gosh Poopy, you're so cynical and street-smart. You cut through all the bullshit and make us see how silly we are.
posted by Hildago at 12:42 AM on September 16, 2002
Gosh Poopy, you're so cynical and street-smart. You cut through all the bullshit and make us see how silly we are.
posted by Hildago at 12:42 AM on September 16, 2002
"Metafilter -- roiling in the pit of sinners"
"Metafilter -- less than fully gruntled"
posted by redshoes3 at 12:49 AM on September 16, 2002
"Metafilter -- less than fully gruntled"
posted by redshoes3 at 12:49 AM on September 16, 2002
Let's do quibble about percentages:
In a thoroughly unscientific analysis of MetaFilter from the last 7 days:
There were 209 total threads started.
I divided them up into two main categories: News and Everything Else. The total number of threads that fit the "News" category is: 136
The total number of threads that fit the "Everything Else" category is "73"
The "News" category was subdivided into 6 smaller sub-categories which were:
1.Editorials, or posts pointing to editorial pieces that didn't quite fit the subjects of the other categories, or posts that both pointed to editorial pieces and also made strong editorial comments themselves.
2. Posts about War, Iraq, Terrorism, 9/11.
3. Posts specifically about and confined to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
4. Posts about Bush or other politicians that aren't directly related to the War or other categories.
5. What I like to call "Issues", or posts about specific, often politicised topics such as drugs, the environment, censorship, etc.
6. "And In Other News...": Posts about other "news" and current events, such as Buzz Aldrin punching someone, obituary threads, Christopher Reeve's condition improving, West Nile Virus alerts etc. Generally posts that point to major news sites.
And here's the breakdown:
1. Editorials: 12
2. War,Terrorism,9/11: 62
3. Israel/Palestine: 1 (amazing, isn't it?)
4. Politics: 8
5: Issues: 13
6: And In Other News: 40
So, MetaFilter was roughly 65% news and 35% Everything Else over the last 7 days.
(DISCLAIMER: I used LoFi to do this calculation so that I would have raw data that reflected how many "unfiltered" posts there were. Therefore, some of these posts were subsequently deleted by Matt. I was interested in seeing how the user interfaces with the site before Matt winnows it down)
posted by evanizer at 1:06 AM on September 16, 2002
In a thoroughly unscientific analysis of MetaFilter from the last 7 days:
There were 209 total threads started.
I divided them up into two main categories: News and Everything Else. The total number of threads that fit the "News" category is: 136
The total number of threads that fit the "Everything Else" category is "73"
The "News" category was subdivided into 6 smaller sub-categories which were:
1.Editorials, or posts pointing to editorial pieces that didn't quite fit the subjects of the other categories, or posts that both pointed to editorial pieces and also made strong editorial comments themselves.
2. Posts about War, Iraq, Terrorism, 9/11.
3. Posts specifically about and confined to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
4. Posts about Bush or other politicians that aren't directly related to the War or other categories.
5. What I like to call "Issues", or posts about specific, often politicised topics such as drugs, the environment, censorship, etc.
6. "And In Other News...": Posts about other "news" and current events, such as Buzz Aldrin punching someone, obituary threads, Christopher Reeve's condition improving, West Nile Virus alerts etc. Generally posts that point to major news sites.
And here's the breakdown:
1. Editorials: 12
2. War,Terrorism,9/11: 62
3. Israel/Palestine: 1 (amazing, isn't it?)
4. Politics: 8
5: Issues: 13
6: And In Other News: 40
So, MetaFilter was roughly 65% news and 35% Everything Else over the last 7 days.
(DISCLAIMER: I used LoFi to do this calculation so that I would have raw data that reflected how many "unfiltered" posts there were. Therefore, some of these posts were subsequently deleted by Matt. I was interested in seeing how the user interfaces with the site before Matt winnows it down)
posted by evanizer at 1:06 AM on September 16, 2002
Of course BushCo is evil, they're in power.
posted by inpHilltr8r at 1:34 AM on September 16, 2002
posted by inpHilltr8r at 1:34 AM on September 16, 2002
Are you a MeFi Lefty
Or a MeFi Righty?
Do you wear Mefi
Tighty Whities?
Are inclined to
Curse and cuss?
Are all your base
Belong to us?
Do you eat pancakes?
Do you want a pony?
Did you like Candy
In "Only the Lonely"?
Did you think Bush
Or Gore had won?
Do you prefer the
Money or the gun?
Do you want news?
Do you use google?
Are you more super
Than the Daily Bugle?
Are you more meta
Or more filter?
Do you think the gray
Is out of kilter?
Do you want "why"
Or "which" or "when"?
Are you more now
Or just more then?
Are you for that
Or against this?
Either way I'll
Take the piss...
posted by Zora Neale Hurston at 1:48 AM on September 16, 2002
Or a MeFi Righty?
Do you wear Mefi
Tighty Whities?
Are inclined to
Curse and cuss?
Are all your base
Belong to us?
Do you eat pancakes?
Do you want a pony?
Did you like Candy
In "Only the Lonely"?
Did you think Bush
Or Gore had won?
Do you prefer the
Money or the gun?
Do you want news?
Do you use google?
Are you more super
Than the Daily Bugle?
Are you more meta
Or more filter?
Do you think the gray
Is out of kilter?
Do you want "why"
Or "which" or "when"?
Are you more now
Or just more then?
Are you for that
Or against this?
Either way I'll
Take the piss...
posted by Zora Neale Hurston at 1:48 AM on September 16, 2002
Evanizer's analysis got me thinking: Is there any particular reason that MeFi doesn't have a system of categories like MeTa? It seems like that would be useful, especially considering the huge volume of posts.
posted by Silune at 1:58 AM on September 16, 2002
posted by Silune at 1:58 AM on September 16, 2002
Neale gets a big sloppy wonderchicken kiss, which is harder than hell to do without lips, I'm tellin' ya.
Silune : Categories have been considered a few times before...
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:09 AM on September 16, 2002
Silune : Categories have been considered a few times before...
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:09 AM on September 16, 2002
Interesting reading. Matt makes a good point. I like the pool analogy.
posted by Silune at 3:35 AM on September 16, 2002
posted by Silune at 3:35 AM on September 16, 2002
Fuck categories. Tabula Rasa man. Kant was an amateur.
posted by insomnyuk at 3:51 AM on September 16, 2002
posted by insomnyuk at 3:51 AM on September 16, 2002
By which I mean to say... fuck artificial categories, I like how the site has evolved with the invisible hand guiding it. A. Smith would be proud.
posted by insomnyuk at 3:52 AM on September 16, 2002
posted by insomnyuk at 3:52 AM on September 16, 2002
Let's do quibble about percentages:
Nice work, Evan.
posted by RJ Reynolds at 9:04 AM on September 16, 2002
Nice work, Evan.
posted by RJ Reynolds at 9:04 AM on September 16, 2002
which is that 3/4ths of the front page posts are just links to newspaper articles about current events. They shouldn't be.
word.
posted by fishfucker at 9:40 AM on September 16, 2002
word.
posted by fishfucker at 9:40 AM on September 16, 2002
One English professor blogs similar reactions about boring and uninsightful content:
I think it's also important to remember the amount of political polarization that's out there right now. Even this relatively mild suggestion for how an American left could play a positive role would provoke howls of outrage:
My solution?
Let's invite Walter Cronkite to step in and moderate a community news filter for us. He says he misses setting a daily news agenda. Anyone know him well enough to run this by him?
posted by sheauga at 10:11 AM on September 16, 2002
"Because the English course I was teaching began shortly after the 9/11 attack and the Afghanistan war was on-course, I opened by setting aside normal business and asking students to write their own reaction to September 11 and developing events. Nearly all the resulting essays followed the same exact narrative pattern: recitation of where the writer was when s/he heard the news, followed by repetition of phrases current in the media. The unoriginality was striking. It was discouraging to listen to the banality of class discussion, one that failed to engage substantively with the political and ethical difficulties of the situation."Obviously, if the world settles on some solutions on Iraq that don't involve launching the equivalent of WWII, the news chatter here will subside considerably, or at least diversify in content.
I think it's also important to remember the amount of political polarization that's out there right now. Even this relatively mild suggestion for how an American left could play a positive role would provoke howls of outrage:
"It would be a positive service to democracy if left-wing public intellectuals would take the lead where elected liberals cannot or will not, urging their fellow Americans that the war on terrorism requires many things - peace in Israel and Palestine, an end to the United States' long-term addiction to oil - before it requires any regime change in Iraq."On top of the ongoing effort to bring civility and content into our remarks, I think we're still struggling as a group with the question of figuring out what current information, though timely and widespread, is of relatively trivial interest or importance-- just like they are over at Jane's. I'm noticing that front page posts with multiple links to challenging, policy-related materials seem to generate a lot less blah-blah arguing about personal opinions than a single hot-button news story. Maybe, in the long haul, we could do something with XML that adds the metadata categories that make it easier to digest all of this stuff.
My solution?
Let's invite Walter Cronkite to step in and moderate a community news filter for us. He says he misses setting a daily news agenda. Anyone know him well enough to run this by him?
posted by sheauga at 10:11 AM on September 16, 2002
MetaFilter was roughly 65% news and 35% Everything Else over the last 7 days.
The last 7 days included the first-year anniversary of 9/11, which probably inflated your "Terrorism/911" news category. Funnily enough, I did a similar rough count last night, but used only 3 days (my hat's off to your persistence, sir). From Aug 29 to 31, I counted around 80 posts (hey, it was late), 9 of which were news of international politics/U.S gov't, 20 of which were other current news, including sports but not science, and 12 of which were weird culture news like that Hawaiian onstage brain tumor thing. More like half than 65%. Might be interesting to compare with August 2001, though.
Not defending all the news links, of course (although I like the idea of unusual Web finds pegged to current news).
posted by mediareport at 10:40 AM on September 16, 2002
The last 7 days included the first-year anniversary of 9/11, which probably inflated your "Terrorism/911" news category. Funnily enough, I did a similar rough count last night, but used only 3 days (my hat's off to your persistence, sir). From Aug 29 to 31, I counted around 80 posts (hey, it was late), 9 of which were news of international politics/U.S gov't, 20 of which were other current news, including sports but not science, and 12 of which were weird culture news like that Hawaiian onstage brain tumor thing. More like half than 65%. Might be interesting to compare with August 2001, though.
Not defending all the news links, of course (although I like the idea of unusual Web finds pegged to current news).
posted by mediareport at 10:40 AM on September 16, 2002
Anyone know him well enough to run this by him?
cronkite? nah. but i once gave flying lessons to art linkletter's daughter.
posted by quonsar at 11:21 AM on September 16, 2002
cronkite? nah. but i once gave flying lessons to art linkletter's daughter.
posted by quonsar at 11:21 AM on September 16, 2002
Wait, there's a lefty majority on Mefi?
I agree that a lot of politically oriented posts have more than their share of snide "Dubya's an idiot" comments. If there are more left than right members, there's going to be more lefty heat in comparison to lefty light. I certainly disagree with evanizer's comment that the "sum total of most political discussions is either "If you're liberal, you must believe this, this and this. If you don't believe this, this and this, you're obviously a conservative, thus you must believe so and so and so, and you must be just like Pat Buchanan." There's a lot of intelligent discussion that goes on, and I've learned a lot from having my ideas challenged.
I don't think Midas's comment was relevant at all to the FPP. Rather than address the story at hand, as I'm sure he is equipped to, he took issue with MeFi's leftiness, and I think he knows this. True, Midas and evanizer come in for more than their share of call-outs because they are two of our more outspoken, and well-spoken, conservative members. But Midas and evanizer also seem to enjoy playing the role of grouchy, snide conservative when it suits them.
If some have a problem with the news/politics related items on MeFi, tough nuts. As always, you're free to ignore the posts that don't interest you. I tend to post about politics because that's one of my main interests, and I try to find and post things that aren't simply news but that have a particular viewpoint or contain details which I think would interest other MeFites and bring light to some of our more longstanding discussions.
Okay, I'm off to find something thoughtful to post about Cheney.
posted by Ty Webb at 11:28 AM on September 16, 2002
I agree that a lot of politically oriented posts have more than their share of snide "Dubya's an idiot" comments. If there are more left than right members, there's going to be more lefty heat in comparison to lefty light. I certainly disagree with evanizer's comment that the "sum total of most political discussions is either "If you're liberal, you must believe this, this and this. If you don't believe this, this and this, you're obviously a conservative, thus you must believe so and so and so, and you must be just like Pat Buchanan." There's a lot of intelligent discussion that goes on, and I've learned a lot from having my ideas challenged.
I don't think Midas's comment was relevant at all to the FPP. Rather than address the story at hand, as I'm sure he is equipped to, he took issue with MeFi's leftiness, and I think he knows this. True, Midas and evanizer come in for more than their share of call-outs because they are two of our more outspoken, and well-spoken, conservative members. But Midas and evanizer also seem to enjoy playing the role of grouchy, snide conservative when it suits them.
If some have a problem with the news/politics related items on MeFi, tough nuts. As always, you're free to ignore the posts that don't interest you. I tend to post about politics because that's one of my main interests, and I try to find and post things that aren't simply news but that have a particular viewpoint or contain details which I think would interest other MeFites and bring light to some of our more longstanding discussions.
Okay, I'm off to find something thoughtful to post about Cheney.
posted by Ty Webb at 11:28 AM on September 16, 2002
Anyone know him well enough to run this by him?
cronkite? nah. but i once gave flying lessons to art linkletter's daughter.
posted by quonsar at 11:21 AM PST on September 16
Wow. that's the most tasteless Quonsar comment ever. I'd tip my hat if it wasn't nailed in place.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 11:43 AM on September 16, 2002
cronkite? nah. but i once gave flying lessons to art linkletter's daughter.
posted by quonsar at 11:21 AM PST on September 16
Wow. that's the most tasteless Quonsar comment ever. I'd tip my hat if it wasn't nailed in place.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 11:43 AM on September 16, 2002
I certainly wasn't making any argument to say anything ought to be stopped
That nicely confirms what Ty posted above, Midas. You *like* things unbalanced and polarized here. Who'da thunk it. And if there's not enough 'left vs. right' stuff going on for your taste, you don't mind creating some. The alternatives -- encouraging everyone to drop blatant editorializing from their front-page posts, for just one example off the top of my head -- don't seem to interest you.
posted by mediareport at 12:25 PM on September 16, 2002
That nicely confirms what Ty posted above, Midas. You *like* things unbalanced and polarized here. Who'da thunk it. And if there's not enough 'left vs. right' stuff going on for your taste, you don't mind creating some. The alternatives -- encouraging everyone to drop blatant editorializing from their front-page posts, for just one example off the top of my head -- don't seem to interest you.
posted by mediareport at 12:25 PM on September 16, 2002
their front-page posts
Er, make that "their front-page news-related posts." Just making sure to be clear.
posted by mediareport at 12:48 PM on September 16, 2002
Er, make that "their front-page news-related posts." Just making sure to be clear.
posted by mediareport at 12:48 PM on September 16, 2002
Nice research, evanizer. Ironically, though, today's front page (as of the time I write this) is a very good mix of topics.
posted by Hildago at 12:56 PM on September 16, 2002
posted by Hildago at 12:56 PM on September 16, 2002
Glad you like the mix. gyc and I just did a bit of pre-emptive linking in the hope of sparing you the inevitable "breaking news!!!" CNN front page post ...
posted by sheauga at 4:24 PM on September 16, 2002
posted by sheauga at 4:24 PM on September 16, 2002
Stav, just want to apologize for my flippant comment. Totally outta line. I personally believe that yes, everyone does have an agenda (whatever that might be), but my response to your statement was arrogant and foolish.
Gosh Poopy, you're so cynical and street-smart. You cut through all the bullshit and make us see how silly we are.
I try. I really really do. :)
posted by poopy at 6:06 PM on September 16, 2002
Gosh Poopy, you're so cynical and street-smart. You cut through all the bullshit and make us see how silly we are.
I try. I really really do. :)
posted by poopy at 6:06 PM on September 16, 2002
Thanks, Ufey - I've followed your lead (also tongue in cheek...)
posted by dash_slot- at 6:14 PM on September 16, 2002
posted by dash_slot- at 6:14 PM on September 16, 2002
No offense taken, poopy. It's all good.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:27 PM on September 16, 2002
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:27 PM on September 16, 2002
Let's invite Walter Cronkite to step in and moderate a community news filter for us.
Tagline:
Metafilter:That's the Way It Is.
posted by jonmc at 6:44 PM on September 16, 2002
Tagline:
Metafilter:That's the Way It Is.
posted by jonmc at 6:44 PM on September 16, 2002
For me at least, the beauty of MetaFilter is that very few users pretend to be neutral, objective and above political sympathy. Lefties are pure lefties (i.e. always wanting to convince non-lefties of the errors of their ways, rather than just being arrogant and indifferent) and conservatives are true conservatives (i.e. quite difficult to catalogue, but eager to hear what others think).
So it's the ideal forum for political debate - everybody gets shouted down but (here's the rub) listened to. I'm an old-fashioned non-individualistic conservative, who believes in community and the State (the kind that libertarians and objectivists despise and lefties - bless'em - understand) so, for people like me, MetaFilter is just dandy.
I love debate; sparks; passion - in fact, I have to say I love intolerance as long as nobody gets to turn their opinions into practice. Conservatives love human diversity and want to keep things as they are (however unpalatable), as long as the State does the job of making sure nobody gets fucked for being different.
This includes being the wrong colour, lazy, stupid, disabled - or just downright difficult.
If I had to explain why old-fashioned conservatives (and lefties) like me find MetaFilter amenable - but not libertarians and objectivists who believe in individualism and want minimum government - I'd have to single out taxes.
I love taxes. Real lefties love taxes. But conservatives who love capitalism, competition and "everyone for himself" (what we in Europe call "liberals") hate taxes. So it's only natural they feel less comfortable here.
The fact that lefties in the U.S. are known as "liberals" doesn't make it easier for us Europeans to suss out the deal here...
posted by MiguelCardoso at 6:59 PM on September 16, 2002
So it's the ideal forum for political debate - everybody gets shouted down but (here's the rub) listened to. I'm an old-fashioned non-individualistic conservative, who believes in community and the State (the kind that libertarians and objectivists despise and lefties - bless'em - understand) so, for people like me, MetaFilter is just dandy.
I love debate; sparks; passion - in fact, I have to say I love intolerance as long as nobody gets to turn their opinions into practice. Conservatives love human diversity and want to keep things as they are (however unpalatable), as long as the State does the job of making sure nobody gets fucked for being different.
This includes being the wrong colour, lazy, stupid, disabled - or just downright difficult.
If I had to explain why old-fashioned conservatives (and lefties) like me find MetaFilter amenable - but not libertarians and objectivists who believe in individualism and want minimum government - I'd have to single out taxes.
I love taxes. Real lefties love taxes. But conservatives who love capitalism, competition and "everyone for himself" (what we in Europe call "liberals") hate taxes. So it's only natural they feel less comfortable here.
The fact that lefties in the U.S. are known as "liberals" doesn't make it easier for us Europeans to suss out the deal here...
posted by MiguelCardoso at 6:59 PM on September 16, 2002
The incessant labeling that goes on here, whether it be the constant chorus of "liberal" or "conservative" or "troll" or "terrorist" or "inflammatory" or "polarizing" is merely commonplace and childish.
(And labeling and decrying "left wing spin" in the same paragraph where one plaintively asks "Can we throw away the left-right distinction and focus on arguments, please?" never fails to amuse.)
We all have those tendencies to label at times. Unfortunately, some here have those tendencies ALL the time.
Others seem to be so threatened by new ideas outside their limited ken, and so unable to develop effective argument to refute or at least analyze such ideas, that they must throw what amount to tantrums about a perceived political bias, or a perceived sinister intent, or a perceived assault on "the community".
However, it is in fact an assault on their own cherished ideas that these folks fear. It's understandable. For some people, some ideas are so threatening that somemeans must be found to push them away, and if the message cannot be silenced, then attempts to silence the messenger must be made.
My heart goes out to these folks, for they are truly suffering...suffering because the world will always be a place filled with alien, frightening ideas.
Or not. MetaFilter may just be part populace of ignorant prigs, who never learned debate is anything more than name-calling, never learned discourse is anything more than "get away", and who will never appreciate or understand a forceful opinion made in part to stimulate thought and discussion. In those cases (and I'm willing to disbelieve my own conjecture on this being MetaPrig), I think the appropriate kindness toward the mannerless is to ignore them.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 10:58 PM on September 16, 2002
(And labeling and decrying "left wing spin" in the same paragraph where one plaintively asks "Can we throw away the left-right distinction and focus on arguments, please?" never fails to amuse.)
We all have those tendencies to label at times. Unfortunately, some here have those tendencies ALL the time.
Others seem to be so threatened by new ideas outside their limited ken, and so unable to develop effective argument to refute or at least analyze such ideas, that they must throw what amount to tantrums about a perceived political bias, or a perceived sinister intent, or a perceived assault on "the community".
However, it is in fact an assault on their own cherished ideas that these folks fear. It's understandable. For some people, some ideas are so threatening that somemeans must be found to push them away, and if the message cannot be silenced, then attempts to silence the messenger must be made.
My heart goes out to these folks, for they are truly suffering...suffering because the world will always be a place filled with alien, frightening ideas.
Or not. MetaFilter may just be part populace of ignorant prigs, who never learned debate is anything more than name-calling, never learned discourse is anything more than "get away", and who will never appreciate or understand a forceful opinion made in part to stimulate thought and discussion. In those cases (and I'm willing to disbelieve my own conjecture on this being MetaPrig), I think the appropriate kindness toward the mannerless is to ignore them.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 10:58 PM on September 16, 2002
Crikey, foldy, you never go for half measures, do you?
And fair enough. When I'm in High Horse Riding Mode, I would have to agree with you about the willful ignorance of some folks in any corner of the political map, although I'm perhaps willing to give those folks a little more benefit of the doubt...
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:04 PM on September 16, 2002
And fair enough. When I'm in High Horse Riding Mode, I would have to agree with you about the willful ignorance of some folks in any corner of the political map, although I'm perhaps willing to give those folks a little more benefit of the doubt...
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:04 PM on September 16, 2002
When I'm in High Horse Riding Mode...
~chuckle~
Doc feels the skin crawl on the back of his neck. He stares up through the darkness toward the voice and sees a second horseman silhouetted against the Milky Way, a stocky wide-shouldered brawny man with sombrero and a grin that shines even by starlight. He is mounted on a horse that must be seventeen hands high."
Ed Abbey - The Monkey Wrench Gang
The horse I ride is usually 18 hands high...each empty, of course.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 11:14 PM on September 16, 2002
~chuckle~
Doc feels the skin crawl on the back of his neck. He stares up through the darkness toward the voice and sees a second horseman silhouetted against the Milky Way, a stocky wide-shouldered brawny man with sombrero and a grin that shines even by starlight. He is mounted on a horse that must be seventeen hands high."
Ed Abbey - The Monkey Wrench Gang
The horse I ride is usually 18 hands high...each empty, of course.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 11:14 PM on September 16, 2002
(And labeling and decrying "left wing spin" in the same paragraph where one plaintively asks "Can we throw away the left-right distinction and focus on arguments, please?" never fails to amuse.)
Ouch.
posted by mediareport at 12:55 AM on September 17, 2002
Ouch.
posted by mediareport at 12:55 AM on September 17, 2002
MetaFilter may just be part populace of ignorant prigs, who never learned debate is anything more than name-calling ...
Someone needs to tell those ignorant prigs that name-calling is wrong.
You're starting to sound almost conciliatory, Fold. It gives me hope that given enough time (think years, not months), the rest of us will have you fully domesticated.
posted by rcade at 6:47 AM on September 17, 2002
Someone needs to tell those ignorant prigs that name-calling is wrong.
You're starting to sound almost conciliatory, Fold. It gives me hope that given enough time (think years, not months), the rest of us will have you fully domesticated.
posted by rcade at 6:47 AM on September 17, 2002
true conservatives (i.e. quite difficult to catalogue, but eager to hear what others think).
Good way to put it without the itchy label, bravo!, Mig.
posted by thomcatspike at 10:45 AM on September 17, 2002
Good way to put it without the itchy label, bravo!, Mig.
posted by thomcatspike at 10:45 AM on September 17, 2002
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by mediareport at 5:15 PM on September 15, 2002