consI/Parcy theory

August 16, 2005 2:52 PM

Are we allowing ConspiracyTheoryFilter to stay on the front page now? That's how it strikes me.
posted by brownpau to Etiquette/Policy at 2:52 PM (49 comments total)

I think certain comments in the thread fleshed out a lot of the noise. There was really good commentary that was probably some of the unbiased I've read in awhile. My only caveat is that I have a tendency to skip over the obviously bias chatter and find the good stuff -- which this thread has. Plus it's over a day it'll be gone in a bit anyway.

Come on, greenhouses as the cause for Palestine's fall?
posted by geoff. at 2:58 PM on August 16, 2005

It was a lame post, and it was discussed yesterday right?
posted by mathowie (staff) at 3:11 PM on August 16, 2005

There's a conspiracy to keep conspiracy posts on the front page. They're in it with the aliens. I saw it on X-Files.
posted by Rothko at 3:20 PM on August 16, 2005

Well, yeah, and we're¹ wondering why you left such a manifestly bad post up.
1. Me, anyway.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 3:39 PM on August 16, 2005

Me too. Steve_@_Linnwood's post got deleted because it was a single link to an op-ed. This put the op-ed here.
posted by timeistight at 4:00 PM on August 16, 2005

There can't be any such thing as a standard for a manifestly bad post when a right-leaning pop singer's blog entry from 1998 is posted strictly for the purpose of pointing out his hypocrisy and is allowed to stand. Best of the web! It must be good, because it's getting lots of comments.

I must apologize for my posts, which are clearly out of touch with Metafilter's standards. I give the fuck up.
posted by 김치 at 4:10 PM on August 16, 2005

Always disappointing to see links to CNN on the front page. Even this source for rather insipid AP story would be marginally better, just because of the superior web design skillz of the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, compared to whatever team of monkeys CNN hired.

Somewhere on the web there must be some interesting writing about this greenhouse operation. Would have been nice if somebody had bothered to go and find it before posting to metafilter on the subject.
posted by sfenders at 4:18 PM on August 16, 2005

so find it and add it to the thread.
posted by amberglow at 4:22 PM on August 16, 2005

There's a conspiracy to keep conspiracy posts on the front page. They're in it with the aliens. I saw it on X-Files.

There's some dude smoking at the door. He says he's with the government. Can he come in?
posted by jonmc at 4:32 PM on August 16, 2005

I'm clearly in the minority here but I don't think it's such a bad post. I could have lived without the editorial "trap" nonsense but the bulk of it is fairly well sourced You know what, fuck that. I just read it again and it's awful.

It is, of course, a trap for the Palestinian Authority...the Palestinians cannot possibly manage...will fail spectacularly... incompetent and unable to run even a simple enterprise.

I was going to say that it was well sourced and the links don't seem too terrible, but this is the clearest example I've ever seen here of how otherwise innocuos links can be mangled to fit an agenda.

Put me in the "manifestly bad" camp.
posted by cedar at 4:41 PM on August 16, 2005

I want to hear more with regard to the theory that Zionists are behind the destruction of the WTC.
posted by Krrrlson at 5:05 PM on August 16, 2005

Krrrlson... forget that... did you hear that there really wasn't a plane crash at the Pentagon? The same people who faked the moon landings faked the Pentagon attack.

That's what all the cool kids are talking about.
posted by cedar at 5:13 PM on August 16, 2005

Yeah, the Charlie Daniels post sucks, too.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 5:17 PM on August 16, 2005

Wow, we've really wasted your time today, ey EB?
posted by hackly_fracture at 5:31 PM on August 16, 2005

Damn straight. I want my money back.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 5:42 PM on August 16, 2005

Steve_at_Linnwood's Christopher Hitchens single link ffp from Slate gets the ax.

My own Frank Rich single link ffp from the NYTimes gets the ax. (Yes, it was a lazy post on my part, but a damn good essay.)

And Charlie Daniels' blog gets a pass?
posted by R. Mutt at 5:49 PM on August 16, 2005

*fpp
posted by R. Mutt at 5:50 PM on August 16, 2005

Yeah, the Charlie Daniels post sucks, too.

We can turn the shittiest post into a decent conversation, EB. That's this place's greatest strength.
posted by jonmc at 5:53 PM on August 16, 2005

I disagree. Assuming the purpose of mefi is decent converstation is the descent into Hell.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 6:00 PM on August 16, 2005

Ethereal Bligh wrote: Assuming the purpose of mefi is decent converstation is the descent into Hell.

Not to single you out EB, your hardly unique in this, but: Ethereal Bligh has posted 5 links and 1501 comments to MetaFilter.

That's looking like plenty of conversation.
posted by cedar at 6:22 PM on August 16, 2005

What can you expect with this steaming pile on the front page?
posted by monju_bosatsu at 6:42 PM on August 16, 2005

amberglow, do you really not see anything wrong with the way that greenhouse post was framed? Do you really not see that as a bad example for the site? I'm having trouble understanding your position on the value to Mefi of blatant editorializing (and this is a hilariously awful example) in front page posts.
posted by mediareport at 7:07 PM on August 16, 2005

Whoops.
posted by Rothko at 7:12 PM on August 16, 2005

I want to hear more with regard to the theory that Zionists are behind the destruction of the WTC.,

said the man who once proudly posted to the front page about imminent pogroms against Canadian Jews.

care to back us up on how that new Canadian Reich policy worked out, Boy Who Cried Wolf?
posted by matteo at 7:20 PM on August 16, 2005

And on and on and on.
posted by eyeballkid at 7:27 PM on August 16, 2005

I removed the most recent post linked by eyeballkid. I thought the Charlie Daniels post had some okay discussion by the time I saw it. I disliked the greenhouse post, but mathowie and I talked about it and he was more on the fence about it and so it stayed.

It's much more difficult to have a reason why something stays on the blue than why it's deleted. If there's not an airtight argument for removal, or if we're both offline for big parts of a day and come back to a bad post that has some good comments, we'll often err on the side of leaving it up.
posted by jessamyn at 7:50 PM on August 16, 2005

Matteo, MeFi has enjoyed some notably calm, non-sarcastic, productive topics & comments in the past ten days or so. If it wouldn't be too much trouble, would you mind extending your vacation to ...... well, indefinitely? You've been nothing but a trolling, punch-throwing fuckwit since your return. Though I realize your brand of faux-superiority & mean-spiritedness receives tacit approval because the masses share your political views.
posted by dhoyt at 8:06 PM on August 16, 2005

Jesus fucking Christ, Dhoyt, can you ever let a Matteo comment go by without slashing at him? Or by using our ignoring of said comment to be evidence of the VAST FUCKING LEFTIST CONSPIRACY TO LOVE MATTEO AND HATE ON DHOYT/CONSERVATIVES?
I mean, c'mon, we all fucking know that you hate Matteo and you hate to let any comment from him go unpunished. I know that you see the community's lack of similar vendtetta as evidence of bias. Can you stop pointing it out for me, just once? I fucking get it already.
posted by klangklangston at 8:42 PM on August 16, 2005

*claps for klangklangston
posted by Quartermass at 9:01 PM on August 16, 2005

It's not such a bad post. It's ridiculously biased, but that's not such a bad thing. I really don't mind when people editoralize in the blue as long as some effort is made to (1) highlight the different sides of the issue (2) educate people about the issues. People having strong opinions about these things is generally a good thing.

P.S. The whole dhoyt/matteo love affair has crossed over from "epic" to "creepy." Just kill it already.
posted by nixerman at 9:24 PM on August 16, 2005

Would the double-question-mark standing in the corner threatening to leave, please reconsider. Thank you.
posted by peacay at 11:12 PM on August 16, 2005

brownpau, where did that mouseover about killing Arafat with poison lasers come from?
posted by davy at 11:12 PM on August 16, 2005

I never used to have a problem with newsfilter, politicsfilter or whatever but it annoys me more and more recently. Metafilter just isn't any good at this shit anymore. Most comments are ignorant or needlessly bitchy.

Even more worrying is this: I'm probably more left wing than most but I find the strange mix of conspiracy theories, wishful thinking and crying wolf from supposed liberals/left-wingers kind of disturbing. Has the political climate in America really reduced people to gibbering idiots?

Am I the only one who's noticed this lurch to the looney side of the left around here?
posted by dodgygeezer at 3:14 AM on August 17, 2005

dodgygeezer, my take is that with the polarization of American politics in the last 5 years or so, politicizing EVERY FUCKING THING that gets posted to MeFi has become more the norm. Posts on art and language and well, anything...get slimed from arsehole to breakfast time with political slandering and rants. Unless a topic really and truly has a political element, I would respectfully ask that people please refrain from tossing in some halfwit crackpot neocon/right wing/Bush sardonic pseudo(not even usually)-humour or diatribe. It's both silly and weird.
/halfwitcrackpotslanderrant
posted by peacay at 3:38 AM on August 17, 2005

Has the political climate in America really reduced people to gibbering idiots?

Yes.

Am I the only one who's noticed this lurch to the looney side of the left around here?

No. But as something of a rarity around here (a Republican MeFite), I didn't think anyone would listen if I mentioned it...
posted by NotMyselfRightNow at 3:55 AM on August 17, 2005

>No. But as something of a rarity around here (a Republican MeFite), I didn't think anyone would listen if I mentioned it...

I'm not listening. And that's a conspiracy, apparently.
posted by gsb at 6:12 AM on August 17, 2005

Are we allowing ConspiracyTheoryFilter to stay on the front page now?

"Now?"
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 6:26 AM on August 17, 2005

It's an unfortunate post, and I wish that it were deleted, but I understand, I guess. Where is another mini-contest when you need it? Aug 1 was a great day.
posted by OmieWise at 6:29 AM on August 17, 2005

Not to encourage these grudgematches--though I'm not that virtuous myself--but I mildly (in comparison) share dhoyt's criticism of matteo. For example, Krrrlson's comment was mildly provocative, but not directed at anyone individually. matteo's response, however, was picking (or continuing) a particular fight. "care to back us up on how that new Canadian Reich policy worked out, Boy Who Cried Wolf?" has such a sneering tone to it; which characterizes much of matteo's comments directed at individual people with whom he politically disagrees. He's no unique in this by a long shot, but he's worse than most. And dhoyt is correct, I think, that there's no way in hell matteo's abrasiveness would be tolerated were he to the right instead of the left.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:27 AM on August 17, 2005

I think that's a crock. If anything, the editors bend over backwards in their attempts to avoid appearing too lefty.

But I know you guys would rather feel put-upon and continue to whine about the UNACKNOWLEDGED LIBERAL MEFI BIAS THAT NO ONE CAN SEE BUT ME BECAUSE I AM FREETHINKING GENIOUS.

Seriously, if you have any warranted confidence in your stance, then you can defend yourself without constantly boohooing about the bias (which is demographic, not editorial.) Conservatives are suppposed to have something downstairs.

speaking as a longtime conservative mefite
posted by sonofsamiam at 9:41 AM on August 17, 2005

Um, you know that I'm a lefty myself, don't you? So I certainly don't feel put-upon by the leftist bias of mefi. That doesn't mean I have to like it.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:50 AM on August 17, 2005

It also doesn't mean you have to constantly whine about it, which I believe was sonofsamiam's point.
posted by gigawhat? at 10:35 AM on August 17, 2005

(That "you" doesn't refer specifically to you, Ethereal Bligh.)
posted by gigawhat? at 10:38 AM on August 17, 2005

I personally intend to keep whining about it.
posted by languagehat at 11:37 AM on August 17, 2005

that makes you a whiner, apparently.
posted by gsb at 3:43 PM on August 17, 2005

lets all remember the Hitchens/ Le Carre tete-ala the news paper concerning salman rushdie

wait, that has no relevance
posted by clavdivs at 4:18 PM on August 17, 2005

"care to back us up on how that new Canadian Reich policy worked out, Boy Who Cried Wolf?" has such a sneering tone to it; which characterizes much of matteo's comments directed at individual people with whom he politically disagrees.

Sometimes. But he's a pussycat. You just have to know how to handle him. The debate stays, but the sneer can be removed.
posted by jonmc at 4:37 PM on August 17, 2005

jonmc writes "You just have to know how to handle him."
And where are these handling rules written praychance?
posted by peacay at 9:05 PM on August 17, 2005

Hey, I wouldn't have gone back and read any of this if it weren't for the new My Comments section. Thanks, Matt.

It's ironic how matteo starts his usual pissing match for no real reason and dhoyt is the one who gets shit for calling him out. I smell puppetry afoot.
posted by Krrrlson at 9:05 PM on August 18, 2005