It could've been better

April 5, 2005 10:16 PM

I think I bungled an FPP.
posted by greatgefilte to Etiquette/Policy at 10:16 PM (13 comments total)

what did you mean to say? or how?

(i thought it was really interesting)
posted by amberglow at 10:21 PM on April 5, 2005

Here's the deal: I thought this was quite an explosive story, destined to bring out some interesting reactions and discussion. But..

a) I think a direct link to background info would've been helpful.

b) I didn't quite realize how much of a hard stance the blog post I linked to took on the matter, however justified it may be.

It could've been better.

I stand by the USS Liberty thing, though... The implication was that if one 'conspiracy' was declared to be true (and how!), perhaps another might be as well at some point...
posted by greatgefilte at 10:24 PM on April 5, 2005

So post a bunch of background links explaining the meaning and situation, and find a more moderate take on it and post as a comment. People do it all the time after they post to help others along.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:35 PM on April 5, 2005

It could've been better.

That's nearly always true. Your phrasing wasn't quite clear enough, but this does not constitute a bungle. And folk around here are particularly bright, so I guess it'll come out fine. Live, learn.
posted by scarabic at 10:37 PM on April 5, 2005

I stand by the USS Liberty thing, though... The implication was that if one 'conspiracy' was declared to be true (and how!), perhaps another might be as well at some point...

I think that THIS is what you bungled. I have posted ten or so links to this issue on your FPP, linking to all of the research done by both the US government and the Israeli government showing that there was no conspiracy. Your post, however, linked only to a conspiracy site, and was nothing but insinuation (as your statement above indicates).

Post what you want, of course, but as I said in my comments, it is like a FPP on the CIA's 1954 coup in Guatamala, and then including a link at the end to a site that claims that the CIA orchestrated 9/11 or killed Kennedy. After all, if they did something underhanded once, how can we discount other accusations? With over a dozen US government reviews and studies showing that there was no conspiracy, posting a link to a conspiracy site is just dirty pool, especially with the implications that "if one conspiracy turns out to be true.."

While I never would have launched a thread in MeTa about this, I still think it is crappy form.
posted by blahblahblah at 12:51 AM on April 6, 2005

There's nothing wrong with reconsidering one historical event when information about another past event comes to light. There may prove to be no connection, and I applaud your productive participation to that effect, blahblahblah. But I think you're actually going over into saying that the question shouldn't even be asked, and that's a bit severe. The post "implies" a connection, as some say, but all it really does is juxtapose the two, and say "see also." Is this an insinuation or a question? It doesn't really matter. It's hardly reckless propaganda. If your own clarifying efforts were worth anything, then so was the question that prompted them.
posted by scarabic at 8:56 AM on April 6, 2005

...I applaud your productive participation to that effect, blahblahblah.

Can we call you blah3? bbblah? blahcube? No matter what anyone says to you, it sounds insincere, blahblahblah.
posted by squirrel at 9:21 AM on April 6, 2005

If you pronounce the French for 3 correctly,"troi," it actually rhymes with blah.

blahtroi.
posted by scarabic at 1:38 PM on April 6, 2005

Squirrel, sorry to appear insincere - I am not sure what seems insincere, however. And I prefer blah^3.
posted by blahblahblah at 2:00 PM on April 6, 2005

Oh, great. A user with enough irony to name himself blahblahblah, but not enough to know that his handle, when added to the end of any phrase, makes it sound insincere.
posted by squirrel at 5:57 PM on April 6, 2005

Damn it, my irony sense has been slowly disappearing as I age. Reminds me of this old Onion article (from cached source).
posted by blahblahblah at 6:19 PM on April 6, 2005

Couldn't get the link to work, blah(hey, where's the up-carrot?)3 but the headline was in the URL and, as with most Onion articles, the headline is half the joke anyway. Viva la sebolla!
posted by squirrel at 3:36 AM on April 7, 2005

D'oh! ^
posted by squirrel at 3:37 AM on April 7, 2005