The Iraqfilter is clogged November 13, 2001 8:08 AM Subscribe
I know that some of us are bored by news about "The War", but isn't this going just a little overboard?
I think it started because it was pretty much a triple post - the second thread, in a row, that could have went under the initial Norther Alliance at Kabul thread.
Regardless, the thread in question became way too childish and reached a level of stupid I comparable to that web-cam clique invasion a few weeks ago.
At least here it was civilized and ended peacefully.
posted by mkn at 8:14 AM on November 13, 2001
Regardless, the thread in question became way too childish and reached a level of stupid I comparable to that web-cam clique invasion a few weeks ago.
At least here it was civilized and ended peacefully.
posted by mkn at 8:14 AM on November 13, 2001
I don't really think it was a triple post. It was actually a rather interesting article about how the people of Taliqan, NOT Kabul, are taking the occupation by the Northern Alliance. And I learned some interesting details about the Taliban's oppression I did not know before. So maybe it was mundane. 83 snarks in 21 minutes? That's gotta be a record.
posted by starvingartist at 8:18 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by starvingartist at 8:18 AM on November 13, 2001
I agree I found the flooding posts very annoying. If you don't like a double post, why not visit MetaTalk and raise a query? It seems hypocritical to fill a thread with garbage just because you feel the thread itself is garbage.
posted by skylar at 8:19 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by skylar at 8:19 AM on November 13, 2001
OK, so I was wrong, it was a double post. Still, the garbage is piling up at an exponential rate. Stavros and iceberg must not have had their coffee this morning.
posted by starvingartist at 8:21 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by starvingartist at 8:21 AM on November 13, 2001
OK, I'm going to bed now.
That was remarkably like snowboarding naked.
Wheeeee!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:25 AM on November 13, 2001
That was remarkably like snowboarding naked.
Wheeeee!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:25 AM on November 13, 2001
Stavros, if you don't have something productive to add to a thread, don't add anything. Hijacking posts is obnoxious and inappropriate. If it's a double or triple post, say so. It's not that tough.
posted by gramcracker at 8:32 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by gramcracker at 8:32 AM on November 13, 2001
Perhaps you could relax that clenched sphincter of yours, gramcracker. It's not that tough.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:38 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:38 AM on November 13, 2001
*I lied about going to bed before*
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:38 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:38 AM on November 13, 2001
Stupid thing is it wasn't a double post. Sure, someone mentioned something vaguely similar (about Kabul, not Taliquan. Thank you StarvingArtist) but nobody had posted a link to what I though was quite an interesting article.
I thought what Stavros did was childish and uncalled for, I was looking forward to hearing people's thoughts on the matter.
posted by TiggleTaggleTiger at 8:41 AM on November 13, 2001
I thought what Stavros did was childish and uncalled for, I was looking forward to hearing people's thoughts on the matter.
posted by TiggleTaggleTiger at 8:41 AM on November 13, 2001
Said Mrs. Thumper to Baby Thumper: "If you can't post something productive, don't post anything at all."
posted by jennak at 8:42 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by jennak at 8:42 AM on November 13, 2001
stavros, I like some of the stuff you've contributed before, but MeFi is not your personal playground. A couple of snarks would have been okay. 100 stupid little comments about how bored you and iceberg are with the thread is out of hand.
posted by starvingartist at 8:53 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by starvingartist at 8:53 AM on November 13, 2001
This kind of boorish behaviour by stavros and iceberg really gets up my nose. To borrow a phrase from football, they deserve a yellow card.
posted by salmacis at 8:53 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by salmacis at 8:53 AM on November 13, 2001
stavrosthewonderchicken, iceberg and eyeballkid are all great posters. They constantly liven up dead threads and always make useful, hilarious and/or intelligent comments which are, thankfully, a staple on MetaFilter. I don't know why they hijacked the thread in question. But we've got to accept that people are packages - of good and bad, silly and clever, childish and mature - and not pick and choose as if they were candy counters.
TiggleTaggleTiger is a consistently interesting poster. I went back and looked at the threads he initiated and they're all good. This post was interesting, IMO, because it brought a real-life aspect to the Kabul takeover. Namely, that barbers were overworked and that, for all the talk of the sanctity of beards(even among the Northern Alliance)Kabulers(?)couldn't wait to shave them off.
*makes note not to buy any made-in-Afghanistan mattresses and pillows for the next few months and to tell wife to forget that chest hair-piece she promised me for Christmas*
So it's not the end of the world, by any means. It's a wee and, above all, a wheee thing. I'm more scared of the consequences than of the cause; I guess is what I want to say.
I wish I had the necessary cintilla of Americanness to say "chill out" but I don't... :(
posted by MiguelCardoso at 8:54 AM on November 13, 2001
TiggleTaggleTiger is a consistently interesting poster. I went back and looked at the threads he initiated and they're all good. This post was interesting, IMO, because it brought a real-life aspect to the Kabul takeover. Namely, that barbers were overworked and that, for all the talk of the sanctity of beards(even among the Northern Alliance)Kabulers(?)couldn't wait to shave them off.
*makes note not to buy any made-in-Afghanistan mattresses and pillows for the next few months and to tell wife to forget that chest hair-piece she promised me for Christmas*
So it's not the end of the world, by any means. It's a wee and, above all, a wheee thing. I'm more scared of the consequences than of the cause; I guess is what I want to say.
I wish I had the necessary cintilla of Americanness to say "chill out" but I don't... :(
posted by MiguelCardoso at 8:54 AM on November 13, 2001
Perhaps you could relax that clenched sphincter of yours, gramcracker. It's not that tough.
Nice trolling, Stavros.
posted by rcade at 8:58 AM on November 13, 2001
Nice trolling, Stavros.
posted by rcade at 8:58 AM on November 13, 2001
Stupid thing is it wasn't a double post.
All of this may have started because of the perception that each subtle nuance of a topic needs its own thread. There's thread hijack (where a thread that is on a particular topic is maliciously taken over), and then there's front page hijack (where a single topic maliciously dominates the front page; see Election 2000 and the week following the 11th of September, 2001).
posted by J. R. Hughto at 9:21 AM on November 13, 2001
All of this may have started because of the perception that each subtle nuance of a topic needs its own thread. There's thread hijack (where a thread that is on a particular topic is maliciously taken over), and then there's front page hijack (where a single topic maliciously dominates the front page; see Election 2000 and the week following the 11th of September, 2001).
posted by J. R. Hughto at 9:21 AM on November 13, 2001
Starvos, I just took away your posting rights, what you did was way over the top and stupid. I'll restore your rights in a day or two, if you calm the hell down.
I'm getting pretty tired of all the in-jokey posts and self-referential garbage going on lately. Has anyone noticed how incredibly self-aware everyone is on metafilter? Do you know how that makes the site look to outsiders?
It's not good.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:24 AM on November 13, 2001 [1 favorite]
I'm getting pretty tired of all the in-jokey posts and self-referential garbage going on lately. Has anyone noticed how incredibly self-aware everyone is on metafilter? Do you know how that makes the site look to outsiders?
It's not good.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:24 AM on November 13, 2001 [1 favorite]
I'm getting pretty tired of all the in-jokey posts and self-referential garbage going on lately. Has anyone noticed how incredibly self-aware everyone is on metafilter? Do you know how that makes the site look to outsiders?
Thank you. Thank you. Thank You.
The kids at the back of the class were driving me nuts. I love metafilter when it's meta and filters. I hate it when it's the chatroom for a handful of members who are much less entertaining than they believe.
posted by websavvy at 9:34 AM on November 13, 2001
Thank you. Thank you. Thank You.
The kids at the back of the class were driving me nuts. I love metafilter when it's meta and filters. I hate it when it's the chatroom for a handful of members who are much less entertaining than they believe.
posted by websavvy at 9:34 AM on November 13, 2001
Asterisk-powered zaniness aside, can I suggest that there was little enough distinguishing that front-page post from others that it should have gone as an inside link in an extant thread? There's nothing wrong with posting informative comments that contain links and point people to ancillary related information. I'd rather see a thread filled up with a dozen informative contents than a dozen largely repetitive front-page posts. The spate of posts for every single story about John Ashcroft was generally agreed to be irritating, was it not?
posted by snarkout at 9:53 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by snarkout at 9:53 AM on November 13, 2001
Well, Matt, you can take away my posting rights as well. Is this all for the benefit of outsiders? Is "what will the neighbours think?" the standard? I think what you did was grossly unfair and, in a way, ungrateful. We all love and admire you, but we are human, just as you are. We make mistakes. Suppose stavrosthewonderchicken(not Starvos)wakes up tomorrow and wants to apologize? Suppose he's going through a hard time right now, which I know, for a fact, he is.
Did you really mean that? I hope not. But I see so much unpunished rubbish going on here(some of it mine, unfortunately)that it seems brutal and harsh to deprive stavrosthewonderchicken of his posting rights.
Please, Matt, consider you yourself may be having a bad day.
Your friend - and stavrosthewonderchickens' -
Miguel
posted by MiguelCardoso at 9:54 AM on November 13, 2001 [1 favorite]
Did you really mean that? I hope not. But I see so much unpunished rubbish going on here(some of it mine, unfortunately)that it seems brutal and harsh to deprive stavrosthewonderchicken of his posting rights.
Please, Matt, consider you yourself may be having a bad day.
Your friend - and stavrosthewonderchickens' -
Miguel
posted by MiguelCardoso at 9:54 AM on November 13, 2001 [1 favorite]
I just want to say I (again) disagree with Miguel's interpretation of an act of authority as a personal attack on a member of MetaFilter.
The fact is, mathowie generously and freely gives us the opportunity to post here. When he feels that that ability is being abused, it is only fair of him to remove either the post in question or the poster. We should all be mindful of him and his feelings for the site when we post here, and should never pretend it is our right to abuse the privilege. His obligation is to protect the integrity of the site, not to hold our hands.
Stavros also has the opportunity to email Matt about this, and we can only trust the two of them will work it out.
That said, I for one would feel more comfortable if I knew better how Matt himself felt about some of the things that go on here, and I hope stav's publishing rights are rapidly restored.
posted by mattpfeff at 10:09 AM on November 13, 2001
The fact is, mathowie generously and freely gives us the opportunity to post here. When he feels that that ability is being abused, it is only fair of him to remove either the post in question or the poster. We should all be mindful of him and his feelings for the site when we post here, and should never pretend it is our right to abuse the privilege. His obligation is to protect the integrity of the site, not to hold our hands.
Stavros also has the opportunity to email Matt about this, and we can only trust the two of them will work it out.
That said, I for one would feel more comfortable if I knew better how Matt himself felt about some of the things that go on here, and I hope stav's publishing rights are rapidly restored.
posted by mattpfeff at 10:09 AM on November 13, 2001
If stavros wants to apologize, he can email Matt and maybe they can work out something. Metafilter is not life! It's also not a democracy! Matt can do whatever the hell he wants. Stavros was out of line. The great thing about MeFi is that we have standards regarding that sort of thing, as opposed to unregulated chat rooms and other forums where people can run rampant. You may think it's unfair, Miguel, but I think it's entirely justified. This place has become so unfocused lately, and wildfire thread hijack like that just makes it worse. If stavros gets pissed about it and continues to act irresponsibly, then he doesn't deserve to use this forum and Matt will yank his account. If, however, he takes this temporary punishment in the light it is meant, perhaps he will be a bit more respectful of the community when he comes back. Stavros, I love ya. Don't be a jerk, please. I don't want to lose anybody here.
posted by starvingartist at 10:10 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by starvingartist at 10:10 AM on November 13, 2001
The post seemed more legit than the previous total double-post, given that the former was decidedly more narrow in its scope and quirky besides. Not sure what anyone was supposed to say about it, besides, "Wow. Good deal for the Kabul guys, at leas for now. And what about the burka things, or however you spell that?" That said, what bothered me was the irony of consistently anti-war posters basically bullying a fellow mefi member for reasons having to do with their ideology. You can't get your way with the war, you'll beat those who oppose into submission, by any means necessary? Yikes.
Oh, and stavros went off about an alleged "war on democracy" in the U.S. yesterday. Posters who want improvement in our nation and society might want to look into the concept of "leading by example."
posted by raysmj at 10:11 AM on November 13, 2001
Oh, and stavros went off about an alleged "war on democracy" in the U.S. yesterday. Posters who want improvement in our nation and society might want to look into the concept of "leading by example."
posted by raysmj at 10:11 AM on November 13, 2001
Now that the link in question has been reposted to the front page, I want to endorse everything snarkout said. Posting new links inside extant threads doesn't just make those threads better, but helps in not pushing them so far down the front page that they quickly get ignored. When posting news-related stuff, can we try to use the front page as a last resort?
posted by liam at 10:14 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by liam at 10:14 AM on November 13, 2001
We repeatedly ask Matt to take a stronger hand in administration and enforcement.
Matt takes a stronger hand in administration and enforcement.
We moan and complain and accuse him of doing something wrong after he wakes up and sees a thread filled with a hundred or so one or two word messages.
Sure, it was a double post, and sure it may have been deleted, and sure it's pretty much the exact same thing that happens in almost every double post.
BUT, it was multiplied a good 25 times more than normal.
Matt's normal reaction is to delete a thread and then do whatever it is he does after deleting a thread. 25 times that is somewhere around banning a poster for a few days.
While I too wish it hadn't happened to someone I like and respect, everyone makes mistakes and has to pay for them.
Stavros made the mistake, not Matt.
posted by cCranium at 10:15 AM on November 13, 2001
Matt takes a stronger hand in administration and enforcement.
We moan and complain and accuse him of doing something wrong after he wakes up and sees a thread filled with a hundred or so one or two word messages.
Sure, it was a double post, and sure it may have been deleted, and sure it's pretty much the exact same thing that happens in almost every double post.
BUT, it was multiplied a good 25 times more than normal.
Matt's normal reaction is to delete a thread and then do whatever it is he does after deleting a thread. 25 times that is somewhere around banning a poster for a few days.
While I too wish it hadn't happened to someone I like and respect, everyone makes mistakes and has to pay for them.
Stavros made the mistake, not Matt.
posted by cCranium at 10:15 AM on November 13, 2001
Well, Matt, you can take away my posting rights as well. Is this all for the benefit of outsiders?
If it was all for the benefit of outsiders, you would be admitting you love reading 100 pointless comments on a thread sufficiently different than an earlier post.
I axed it and put starvos in the timeout corner because I think he overstepped his bounds as a member, he shit on the site, dozens of times, when he thought something was a double post.
I hate to see threads filled with pointless stuff, because a few people have figured out that I will delete them later so they have carte blanche to go nuts. I merely mention outsiders because I think many of the most prolific members of this community forget to look beyond the ends of their noses sometimes. I'm saying stop, wake up, and ask yourself what a double post thread containing 50 comments about pancakes look like to someone who is not a hardcore member here? Now, what if the thread had one single comment that said "this is a double post, please keep the conversation going here (link to old thread)" and no other comments? What do you think the outsider would think of that?
Suppose he's going through a hard time right now, which I know, for a fact, he is.
I'm sorry I didn't check my Starvos' mood calandar before reacting. I'm an insensitive bastard for not taking into account everyone's feelings. I should think of everyone's self-esteem first and foremost, the quality of the site second.
But I see so much unpunished rubbish going on here(some of it mine, unfortunately)that it seems brutal and harsh to deprive stavrosthewonderchicken of his posting rights.
I'd like to start punishing more of this rubbish because I see it too. You actually have done some stuff recently that has made me think about emailing you or starting a metatalk thread about certain behaviors. Nothing has been striking enough to warrant it though, it's sort of a general level of rubish on the rise. I believe seeing dozens of pointless comments by a single member, meant to derail and hijack a thread is certainly just cause for temporary banishment.
Please, Matt, consider you yourself may be having a bad day.
I woke up feeling great, then I opened up a browser and typed "metafilter.com" and yeah, I'm now having a bad day. I wonder what caused it though? hmmm....
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:20 AM on November 13, 2001
If it was all for the benefit of outsiders, you would be admitting you love reading 100 pointless comments on a thread sufficiently different than an earlier post.
I axed it and put starvos in the timeout corner because I think he overstepped his bounds as a member, he shit on the site, dozens of times, when he thought something was a double post.
I hate to see threads filled with pointless stuff, because a few people have figured out that I will delete them later so they have carte blanche to go nuts. I merely mention outsiders because I think many of the most prolific members of this community forget to look beyond the ends of their noses sometimes. I'm saying stop, wake up, and ask yourself what a double post thread containing 50 comments about pancakes look like to someone who is not a hardcore member here? Now, what if the thread had one single comment that said "this is a double post, please keep the conversation going here (link to old thread)" and no other comments? What do you think the outsider would think of that?
Suppose he's going through a hard time right now, which I know, for a fact, he is.
I'm sorry I didn't check my Starvos' mood calandar before reacting. I'm an insensitive bastard for not taking into account everyone's feelings. I should think of everyone's self-esteem first and foremost, the quality of the site second.
But I see so much unpunished rubbish going on here(some of it mine, unfortunately)that it seems brutal and harsh to deprive stavrosthewonderchicken of his posting rights.
I'd like to start punishing more of this rubbish because I see it too. You actually have done some stuff recently that has made me think about emailing you or starting a metatalk thread about certain behaviors. Nothing has been striking enough to warrant it though, it's sort of a general level of rubish on the rise. I believe seeing dozens of pointless comments by a single member, meant to derail and hijack a thread is certainly just cause for temporary banishment.
Please, Matt, consider you yourself may be having a bad day.
I woke up feeling great, then I opened up a browser and typed "metafilter.com" and yeah, I'm now having a bad day. I wonder what caused it though? hmmm....
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:20 AM on November 13, 2001
I'd like to start punishing more of this rubbish because I see it too.
Bravo.
posted by snarkout at 10:22 AM on November 13, 2001
Bravo.
posted by snarkout at 10:22 AM on November 13, 2001
Thank you for responding, Matt.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 10:35 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by MiguelCardoso at 10:35 AM on November 13, 2001
mathowie: I'd like to offer up an apology. I joined in on the trouble making because I did see that post as a double and figured it would be deleted. I still see the repost as a double post to a post that you deleted earlier. That post and every other link on the web today about the Taliban fleeing Kabul features pictures and copy about beard shaving and general merry-making. I didn't see a difference between that and TTT's post about Taliqan.
However, I do not rule here (nor should I) and I agree that "many of the most prolific members of this community forget to look beyond the ends of their noses sometimes." That includes me and the lunacy that thread became, hence the apology and I'll bear that in mind in future threads.
posted by eyeballkid at 11:15 AM on November 13, 2001
However, I do not rule here (nor should I) and I agree that "many of the most prolific members of this community forget to look beyond the ends of their noses sometimes." That includes me and the lunacy that thread became, hence the apology and I'll bear that in mind in future threads.
posted by eyeballkid at 11:15 AM on November 13, 2001
I feel like Matt is the local law enforcement that was, until recently, slacking off. Now he's mad as hell and, like, he might take away your posting rights, and stuff. And he might not give them back...for, like, days. What worse punishment for a metafilter member?
posted by gleemax at 11:23 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by gleemax at 11:23 AM on November 13, 2001
Having every stupid thing you've ever said remain here for eternity?
posted by y2karl at 11:26 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by y2karl at 11:26 AM on November 13, 2001
i'm glad that the repost has inspired some pretty good commentary. i feel bad for calling out TTT's repost the way i did, and i apologize; whatever confusion the wording of the second post caused is tempered by my selfish need to be first with the metatalk post about it.
posted by moz at 11:30 AM on November 13, 2001
posted by moz at 11:30 AM on November 13, 2001
This is exactly the same feeling I have when I have a friend sleep over and my parents are fighting.
posted by ColdChef at 11:33 AM on November 13, 2001 [1 favorite]
posted by ColdChef at 11:33 AM on November 13, 2001 [1 favorite]
This is exactly the same feeling I have when I have a friend sleep over and my parents are fighting.
Now I really feel old.
posted by y2karl at 6:38 PM on November 13, 2001
Now I really feel old.
posted by y2karl at 6:38 PM on November 13, 2001
Matt has reinstated my posting rights, and I'd like to use them to apologize before I do anything else.
First to TTT for crapping all over what wasn't a terrible post by any means. Second, to gramcracker, above, for being an asshole. Third, to Matt, for abusing his hospitality and acting like a drunken teenager, bending the rules until they broke, pissing him off, and forcing his hand. I'm sure he has better things to do than play babysitter when the wonderchicken gets drunk.
Fourth, to the community. As I said in my email to Matt, there are rights one has a part of any community that are earned by accepting the concommitant responsibilties. By going off on a giddy funrun with the other culprits on that thread, I behaved as if I were acting in a vacuum, and that was wrong, and disruptive. Anyone who has an idea of my character through my presence here knows that I like to joke around and have fun, but I am more than just a clown (and some would probably argue that I'm not even much of a clown). I am very conscious of the need for members of this community to observe a common code of conduct, and am as quick as anyone to jump all over a fellow MeFite, or at least tut-tut to myself, when that code is breached.
I (we!) went apeshit for a few minutes, and Metafilter would degenerate into chaos if only a tiny percentage of the members here thought it was within their rights to do the same. It was egregiously stupid, and I apologize sincerely to everyone here.
I'm installing a breathalyzer on my monitor today.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:40 PM on November 13, 2001
First to TTT for crapping all over what wasn't a terrible post by any means. Second, to gramcracker, above, for being an asshole. Third, to Matt, for abusing his hospitality and acting like a drunken teenager, bending the rules until they broke, pissing him off, and forcing his hand. I'm sure he has better things to do than play babysitter when the wonderchicken gets drunk.
Fourth, to the community. As I said in my email to Matt, there are rights one has a part of any community that are earned by accepting the concommitant responsibilties. By going off on a giddy funrun with the other culprits on that thread, I behaved as if I were acting in a vacuum, and that was wrong, and disruptive. Anyone who has an idea of my character through my presence here knows that I like to joke around and have fun, but I am more than just a clown (and some would probably argue that I'm not even much of a clown). I am very conscious of the need for members of this community to observe a common code of conduct, and am as quick as anyone to jump all over a fellow MeFite, or at least tut-tut to myself, when that code is breached.
I (we!) went apeshit for a few minutes, and Metafilter would degenerate into chaos if only a tiny percentage of the members here thought it was within their rights to do the same. It was egregiously stupid, and I apologize sincerely to everyone here.
I'm installing a breathalyzer on my monitor today.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:40 PM on November 13, 2001
And let that be a lesson to you! :)
Thanks, Matt. Sorry for the sulk...
posted by MiguelCardoso at 7:58 PM on November 13, 2001
Thanks, Matt. Sorry for the sulk...
posted by MiguelCardoso at 7:58 PM on November 13, 2001
(takes sign off stavros back) "try and be THE clown again, and you WILL be standing tall before the man". This is why this place is great.
posted by clavdivs at 6:22 AM on November 14, 2001
posted by clavdivs at 6:22 AM on November 14, 2001
For Stavros, with my love:
Drunk Chicken
Cooking a chicken on a beer can. Prep Time: approx. 15 Minutes. Cook Time: approx. 2 Hours . Ready in: approx. 2 Hours 15 Minutes. Makes 1 whole chicken (4 servings).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 (2 to 3 pound) whole chicken
1 (12 fluid ounce) can beer
1/4 cup and 1 tablespoon
poultry seasoning 1 long metal skewer
4 dashes liquid smoke flavoring
4 bay leaves
Directions
1 Rinse and dry the chicken. Remove excess fat and leave
skin on. Lift skin from breast and thigh areas, slide bay
leaves under skin. Coat chicken with poultry seasoning.
2 Drink half the can of beer[!], pour liquid smoke into
remaining beer. Raise tab on beer can until it is in the
straight up position.
3 Insert beer can into chicken from the bottom until even
with bottom of chicken. Insert skewer through the wing,
ribs, tab on beer can, and out the opposite side. (this
keeps the can from falling out the chicken).
4 Prepare grill: light the coals, and when they are
ready, spread coals to form a ring around the outside edge of the grill.
5 Place chicken in center standing up on can to cook.
Cover and cook for two hours.
6 Remove carefully from grill so as not to spill the
contents of the can. Remove skewer and beer can, let chicken
sit for fifteen minutes before cutting.
posted by ColdChef at 6:29 AM on November 14, 2001 [1 favorite]
Drunk Chicken
Cooking a chicken on a beer can. Prep Time: approx. 15 Minutes. Cook Time: approx. 2 Hours . Ready in: approx. 2 Hours 15 Minutes. Makes 1 whole chicken (4 servings).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 (2 to 3 pound) whole chicken
1 (12 fluid ounce) can beer
1/4 cup and 1 tablespoon
poultry seasoning 1 long metal skewer
4 dashes liquid smoke flavoring
4 bay leaves
Directions
1 Rinse and dry the chicken. Remove excess fat and leave
skin on. Lift skin from breast and thigh areas, slide bay
leaves under skin. Coat chicken with poultry seasoning.
2 Drink half the can of beer[!], pour liquid smoke into
remaining beer. Raise tab on beer can until it is in the
straight up position.
3 Insert beer can into chicken from the bottom until even
with bottom of chicken. Insert skewer through the wing,
ribs, tab on beer can, and out the opposite side. (this
keeps the can from falling out the chicken).
4 Prepare grill: light the coals, and when they are
ready, spread coals to form a ring around the outside edge of the grill.
5 Place chicken in center standing up on can to cook.
Cover and cook for two hours.
6 Remove carefully from grill so as not to spill the
contents of the can. Remove skewer and beer can, let chicken
sit for fifteen minutes before cutting.
posted by ColdChef at 6:29 AM on November 14, 2001 [1 favorite]
By going off on a giddy funrun with the other culprits on that thread, I behaved as if I were acting in a vacuum, and that was wrong, and disruptive.
It was indeed. My apologies as well. I will now soberly return to my routine of posts with linky goodness.
*wanders off to make amends by setting a good example*
posted by iceberg273 at 6:32 AM on November 14, 2001
It was indeed. My apologies as well. I will now soberly return to my routine of posts with linky goodness.
*wanders off to make amends by setting a good example*
posted by iceberg273 at 6:32 AM on November 14, 2001
Forget the rallying cry of the early eighties, welcome to the 21 century - I Want My Metafilter.
posted by Voyageman at 8:02 AM on November 14, 2001
posted by Voyageman at 8:02 AM on November 14, 2001
I'm just gonna pop back into this thread to say that I noticed that tonight is my 1 year anniversary on Metafilter, and by the super-mecha-nipple-christ, knowing as I do how completely temporally-clueless I am, the fact that I've noted it shows how damn important this place is to me.
For what it's worth.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:41 AM on November 16, 2001 [1 favorite]
For what it's worth.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:41 AM on November 16, 2001 [1 favorite]
Happy Anniversary, Sweetheart.
*kiss*
posted by ColdChef at 11:11 AM on November 16, 2001 [1 favorite]
*kiss*
posted by ColdChef at 11:11 AM on November 16, 2001 [1 favorite]
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
< !-- br> :)
-->
posted by chrisroberts at 8:14 AM on November 13, 2001