That may be true, but have you heard what's going on in Big Brother 2 in the UK? I can't believe Paul still hasn't been voted out!
posted by astro38 at 9:57 AM on July 12, 2001

I agree with your reservations, but the inevitable defense for these links is that any criticism of their presence here is caused by simple elitism.

Maybe I'm just a pretentious bastard, but I agree that these are topics that are so broad and shallow in their reach that MetaFilter never would have had discussions about them until it expanded to its current numbers.
In the old days, would this type of link have read something like:

Interested in the addictive TV show Big Brother? The best web resources on the shows are Mighty Big TV and Gist. Know of any others?

(I picked those links at random, I have no real idea how well they cover "reality" shows.)

Perhaps the posting guidlines need to be more instructive in what causes discussion, and what topics are so broad and all-pervasive that a MetaFilter thread is redundant.

posted by anildash at 9:58 AM on July 12, 2001

the appropriate rejoinder: "take it to realityblurred"
posted by judith at 10:14 AM on July 12, 2001

While we don't need a link to Big Bro, etc every day I don't see why we can't have discussions about them.

megnut: didn't you say the same thing about sports?
posted by owillis at 10:22 AM on July 12, 2001

Meg, I don't want to sound uncharitable, but your post comes across a lot like, "Can we not talk about stuff that I think sucks?" (This is ignoring a certain anti-TV bias I've detected around here before.)

I watched the first season of Survivor, but haven't watched any of its ilk since. But others do . . . why should we try to restrict discussion? Hell, how would we? (I would however agree with Anil that there is an art to posting and topicality of posting that may have gone by the wayside--not that I'm holding myself up as any kind of exemplar.)

I could just as easily post:

"Do we really need to discuss Microsoft, Zeldman, Doubleclick etc. on Metafilter? It's bad enough hearing people talk about these web institutions everywhere you go, does this community need to 'go there' as well?"
posted by Skot at 10:24 AM on July 12, 2001

[T]he inevitable defense for these links is that any criticism of their presence here is caused by simple elitism. And the best retort would be that the posts don't attract enough discussion on their own, and people should follow the reactions of their fellows as guidelines for posting.

Yet, I haven't stopped posting links about PNG and astrosociologists, many of which continually fall flat, and of which my defense would be ... uh ...

I really like the run-it-up-the-flagpole-and-see-who-salutes attitude of MeFi. With greater volume of posts, we're in for many more duds. Maybe we could discuss ways to rate posters, filters (filtering MetaFilter, there's a thought!), or greater customization (indexing of some kind?).
posted by rschram at 10:32 AM on July 12, 2001

Judith - No, you are not a pretentious bastard. You are a person who is part of a community that is growing exponentially. MeFi is suffering from the old techology, dog year, standard - every seven weeks is a year in the life of this community. This place is growing by leaps and bounds with a very loose operating standard.

And that sucks.
And it is also the coolest thing about this place.

*************
Meg, I am standing right behind you in line on this issue. There is some AOL-esque shit going on right now. This is what happens when a 30 million people get dialup accounts. This shit just happens. Not to say that it is right!! But I will say that it is natural growth for any community.

What will filter out this crap is intelligence though. The jerks will leave when their stupid links are not discussed. It will become boring for them and *they* (whoever the fuck that is) will go back to their porn sites and People Mag. If we use our heads, stick to our guns, the place will be fine.

Just tow the line for a while. There is enough good thought going on here that will allow MeFi to survive. And flourish. And filter out the bad seeds. There are only about 50 million people we have to get through. Dag.

Patience is a virtue.
Good things come to those who wait.


ps - FWIW......i was completely obsessed with that Chains Of Love" thing. so there.
posted by sardines at 10:37 AM on July 12, 2001

Owillis, um, I guess I don't consider these TV shows "timely event[s]" And Skot, you're right, this post seems like I'm just saying, "let's not talk about stuff I dislike," which perhaps I am. It's hard to put this general feeling I have into words (without it turning into another Things Were So Much Better Before post). I think Anil gets close though, there's a sense I have of MetaFilter, of what kinds of conversations occur here, of what kind of posts spur interesting and lively conversations, and it's hard to quantify.

One of the things I think makes the discussion after a Fray story so great is that Derek asks a question for people to answer. I think that helps foster interesting conversations, and it works here as well. For example, a post could begin, "King Kong beats Godzilla in fight," or it could begin, "King Kong beats Godzilla in fight, what's the best monster fight you've seen?"

The first example may initiate a cool discussion, it may not. It may just rehash news that people can find any old place, news that doesn't help make MetaFilter a meaningful site in which to participate. I think the second example starts the discussion in a way the ensures a more interesting response, one that draws on the unique experiences and perspectives of the MetaFilter community. Those are the discussions that keep me coming back. And I feel like I'm participating in less and less of them every day.

Maybe I chose a bad example by singling out the reality TV posts. Maybe I didn't spend the time crafting a good post the way I should have (and the way I expect others to). That's all entirely possible. We all harp on people who post a link to a generic Yahoo! news story, why? Because we can get that on our own. I don't need MetaFilter to point me to today's top news stories. Just like I don't need MetaFilter to rehash the results of a TV show that I may or may not have watched. Now if someone were to post something about a reality TV show and then ask, "could you live with cameras pointed at you 24/7 in a house full of strangers?" I think it might be more interesting to follow the discussion.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe that's not what MetaFilter is about anymore. Perhaps we've grown to a size where the "around the office water cooler"-type conversations are inevitable, but my gut feeling isn't so much that the topics are the problem, it's the way the topics are introduced. It's the "let's just shoot the shit online because I'm bored at work" tone that so many threads have taken rather than "let's discuss something in earnest and come away more knowledgeable for having done so."
posted by megnut at 11:08 AM on July 12, 2001

Meg, you rock. I was coming on to MeTa to post this exact thought.

Accusations of "cultural elitism" be damned. Anyone is perfectly free to post a thread condemning the volume of threads concerning US politics. (I was, in fact, once censured for adding to a glut of John Ashcroft threads, during that whole debacle.) The fact is, I'm finding fewer and fewer MeFi posts that I care to even read, let alone comment on. The trend in Reality TV posts is a reason why.

There are plenty of places to discuss those shows, but MeFi isn't one of them. And I don't mean just from my perspective. Would you rather talk about those shows in an environment where more people actually watched them?
posted by jpoulos at 11:12 AM on July 12, 2001

sardines, you're right! i'm not a pretentious bastard at all! and i'm not even following why anyone might think i am, based on this thread. of course, there's lots of other threads out there...

posted by judith at 11:13 AM on July 12, 2001

Would you rather talk about those shows...

I mean, wouldn't you rather talk about those shows...
posted by jpoulos at 11:27 AM on July 12, 2001

Meg, thanks for the clarification. I think I'm getting you now, and am finding it tough to argue. And to address jpoulous's perspective, I'd say that Meg's dictum--that HOW you introduce a topic is nearly more important than the topic itself in terms of fostering a discussion--might stave off redundant "oh fuck another Reality TV" posts. If you get it right the first time, it might obviate any perceived need for followup.

I don't know. I'm just trying to come to terms with the growing pains of a site that I cherish and am worrying about. Because it's hard also for me to argue with this:

The fact is, I'm finding fewer and fewer MeFi posts that I care to even read, let alone comment on.
posted by Skot at 11:28 AM on July 12, 2001

meg:

i can't find the metatalk thread (and maybe it was a metafilter thread instead), but i do remember there was once a discussion about the merits of a separate site, the threads of which would be devoted entirely to current news. maybe this is something that's not such a bad idea. it would probably do away with most of the intense ideological arguments that do seem to occur every other day or so here on mefi.

so what do you guys think?
posted by moz at 11:52 AM on July 12, 2001

there was once a discussion about the merits of a separate site,

There's always talk about "separate sites" devoted to one thing or another (linkless posts, for example). The fact is, however, that just because there's a demand for something doesn't mean Matt has to provide it. There are plenty of sites devoted to current news, or Big Brother or "who here smokes pot?". The 'net is a big place, people.
posted by jpoulos at 11:57 AM on July 12, 2001

Oh fuck.

Judith, apparentlly I am a self-victim of ireallydidnotreadthethreadtooclealy syndrome. It is a bitchy disease. I should have been commeting on Anildash. Apologies to you Judith. And Apologies to you Dash. Suffice to say - put a fork in me....i am done.

Dag - is that a bottle of Jameson sitting on my router?

Whoa Nellie!

shit . Move those 100 base wires out of the way. I have my prioities. Screw your network connectivity. I have no time for your AOL bullshit. Whisky is king

*********
heh heh heh.......
judith, anil and the rest of you - rock on. Seriously. All of you - rock on. I really look forward to your thoughts on a daily basis.

y'all fucking rock in my book. you reallly do for me, it is really that simple.

posted by sardines at 12:10 PM on July 12, 2001

metafilter is probably the only reason I even know about big brother and survivor. which is to say, I wouldn't have heard of either show if they hadn't been mentioned on the front page numerous times starting in 2000.

I don't think it's a matter of more people, I think maybe the television cycle started again, and in the meantime we forgot what it was like before....
posted by rebeccablood at 12:17 PM on July 12, 2001

Skot wrote:
I could just as easily post:

"Do we really need to discuss Microsoft, Zeldman, Doubleclick etc. on Metafilter? It's bad enough hearing people talk about these web institutions everywhere you go, does this community need to 'go there' as well?"

But the thing is, if I go to the water cooler at an average american company, or if I talk to my relatives on the phone, or if I pick up a newspaper, turn on a TV, or watch the "news," I won't hear much about Microsoft, Zeldman, and Doubleclick (ok, maybe microsoft, but it won't be about how evil they may or may not be).

I think Meg is saying keep the survivor/bigbrother/realworld talk confined to People Magazine, Entertainment Tonight, and TV Guide, and keep the regular non-mainstream press stuff coming. There are already a billion and one outlets for RealityTV talk, and there is only one for talking about All Things Kottke.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 12:29 PM on July 12, 2001

I think rather than complaining about what people are posting, maybe the people who are upset with Big Brother posts should make some good, quality threads of their own.
You can't stop Survivor links, they're inevitable. The only hope is increasing the amount of posts that are interesting.
posted by Doug at 12:31 PM on July 12, 2001

What if we had some sort of competition, whereby one user a week was voted off of MeFi. Because lame linkeage would likely single you out come voting time, more thought would go into the front page posts... of course, there would still be the alliances and all of that going on behind the scenes, but it could be pretty dramatic. Plus we could run 24hr webcam feeds, so that if anybody tried to sleep their way onto the A-List, we'd see it...

Mostly I just want to see Mathowie in one of those Jungle Jim hats.
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 12:37 PM on July 12, 2001

What I meant to say was "Who would YOU like to see in a Jungle Jim hat?"

Sorry for the poor postcraft.
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 12:43 PM on July 12, 2001

So we're agreed that CuJoe is getting the boot now, right?
posted by Skot at 12:54 PM on July 12, 2001

I tend to see these tv shows as "timely events", sports too, and music for that matter. None of them change the world, but they can be interesting to talk about.

Maybe its me. But I'm still reading this as a kind of elitism. Yeah, we shouldn't have a "Daily Mefi Big Brother Update" but I can't see the harm in discussing more "mainstream" topics right beside All Your Base, Radiohead, NPR and Nader.

But then, I'm a bit of a populist, so...
posted by owillis at 12:55 PM on July 12, 2001

Meg, you're forgetting that MeFi is all about the lowest common denominator nowadays. Not a criticism and not necessarily a bad thing (as owillis noted), but it's true all the same.
posted by jkottke at 1:16 PM on July 12, 2001

...wow, and that from the A-List Itself. Time to turn in your membership cards, folks.
posted by jpoulos at 1:19 PM on July 12, 2001

Perhaps some questions, along the lines of "What makes something Metafilter-worthy" would help if right above or linked to the place where you comment (or on the preview page).

Here's some newsworthy characteristics:

Prominence - Something that happens to a politician, public servant or a celebrity is more interesting than if it happens to someone not known by many. The marriage of the mayor, or the star player on the local university football team being arrested for fighting outside a local bar at midnight, are news.

Timeliness - An event that happened recently. A story about the prevention of sunburn is more timely at the beginning of summer than in November. Most stories in a newspaper, especially on the news pages, have a sense of timeliness. The word "news" implies information that is new or timely.

Impact - Something that will effect a large number of readers. A bill passed in the state senate that requires all eighth graders to pass a test before they will be allowed to advance to the ninth grade has a great deal of impact on many readers. Likewise a new manufacturing plant coming to town that will employ 1,400 workers is also news.

Conflict - Events that denote a difference of opinion that puts parties in conflict are often news worthy. Conflict usually involves surprise, tension and/or suspense. Some typical events in conflict are: sporting events, political campaigns, social issues and crime.

Novelty - Events that are unique, strange or odd. A unique event might be that a local person wins $1 million in the lottery. A strange event could be a deer running through the downtown area of a large city or a fire station catching fire.

But the Metafilter questions could be like a checklist. "Have you searched to make sure this hasn't been posted already? Are you self-linking? Was it on Yahoo? blah blah? blah blah blah blah blah?"
posted by timothompson at 1:21 PM on July 12, 2001

lowest common denominator

I don't think that I am cool enough or smart enough to participate.
posted by mmm at 1:25 PM on July 12, 2001

CrazyUncleJoe's posts are why I think the poster's name should come first so I can make sure I am not drinking something while reading. Thankfully, when I laughed this time I did not get coffee on my monitor.

There are growing camps that want to discuss daily mainstream "news" and at times these thread can actually be interesting. I have nearly given up on finding odd bits to post. I thought this post would generate more of a response and I am getting the impression that what I think is interesting is not true to the Mefi crowd. I have declined to post several things already. They were things that required someone to read the full story to get it. I feel that people are not reading the links thoroughly or at all. The amount of daily posts dilutes the Mefi conversational continuity.

This conversational continuity concept is something I used to have here. It's loss created an underlying tension that I think erupted here. I have usually been able to shrug off comments that annoyed me.

As a way to quickly relate worthiness of a post how about a "did you think this was a helpful/good post? Yes or No." You would have to enter the thread the see it. It would display the tally on the front page though. This way people could opt out of responding to a bad thread, but still leave a "response."

posted by john at 1:39 PM on July 12, 2001

you can't argue taste. there's a folly in doing so, and it is hubris.
posted by Hackworth at 1:44 PM on July 12, 2001

I think I changed my point between the post that started this and my longer post in the middle, and I'd like to reiterate (summarize?) that second point: it's not so much the content as the way in which it's presented.

I wouldn't mind the reality TV posts if there were something in them that extended the initial concept, as it were. Why is it important to discuss the post? What about it matters to us? What perspective can someone in this community provide that I can't get anywhere else? That's what makes a thread vibrant, in my opinion. If it's elite to expect some sort of intellectual discourse on this site, then fine, I'm elitist.

And as for Doug's post, I don't think simply posting more interesting threads is the solution. There were over 15 threads today by 11:30 AM Pacific. More content won't help, we need content that's being posted to stimulate more provocative discussion.
posted by megnut at 1:48 PM on July 12, 2001

MeFi is all about the lowest common denominator nowadays.

That is not true. The reason I put up with Mefi is that this is not true. While there are more posts about things I don't care about, there are still ones that are worth my time. Even in the posts I don't like there are responses that are worth reading. The bad and good are intertwined.

you can't argue taste. there's a folly in doing so, and it is hubris.

But you can cultivate it. Steering things away from the LCD through example or other means is better then just ignoring it or whining about it.
posted by john at 1:50 PM on July 12, 2001

Meg – After my first sarcastic comment I wanted to say thank you for making your point clearer. I agree that content presented in a provocative manner is always more interesting. However, making limitations regarding the nature of the content seems problematic. Personally I am not a fan of Big Brother (and the other reality shows) but I choose not to read those threads.
posted by mmm at 2:04 PM on July 12, 2001

As much as I appreciate being mentioned as a good example, I've gotta say this: MetaFilter is not {fray}. They're really apples and oranges. {fray} is a highly controlled community environment (I post the stories, you have one opportunity to comment on each), whereas MeFi is uncontrolled (everyone gets to start a thread whenever they want). It's precisely this different that makes MeFi so wonderful, and, at times, horrible (if you think links to reality shows every day is horrible, that is).

If you have an uncontrolled forum like that, you can't control what people say or how they say it. I was going to suggest that maybe Matt should really reiterate what a good post is in the posting process, but he's done that. And check out the add a post page - the example post includes a question already!

I think, really, MeFi is working exactly as it should be. If the tone of the threads is changing, it's because the community is evolving. While no one will like all of the threads, no one should expect to (at this point, I'm happy when I find one a day that really floats my boat).

If anything, some better tools to sort the deluge might help (like post categories, filters, and favorites). So long as the default view is "show me everything that was posted today," and so long as human nature stays human nature, we'll keep having this conversation.

posted by fraying at 2:09 PM on July 12, 2001

MetaFilter is not {fray}

I didn't say it was. All I said was a technique you use could work well here to spawn intriguing discussions. But you're right, this is an uncontrolled forum and no one can control what people say or how they say it. Perhaps the community has evolved into its awkward teenage years and I'm just finding it hard to love these days.
posted by megnut at 2:21 PM on July 12, 2001

(Hey Meg, I know you weren't saying that. I was just using the comment as a springboard. It's all good!)

(Also, I love the phrase "awkward teenage years.")
posted by fraying at 2:25 PM on July 12, 2001

Perhaps the community has evolved into its awkward teenage years...

Well, that would explain this zit I just got on my forehead. Oh, and the compulsive masturbation... :-)
posted by jpoulos at 2:54 PM on July 12, 2001

Perhaps some questions, along the lines of "What makes something Metafilter-worthy" would help if right above or linked to the place where you comment (or on the preview page).

Pfft. Survivor and Big Brother somehow are deemed unworthy and yet we prattle on endlessly about pancakes, horses, ponies, ice cream, kitties and Zippty BOP. And don't tell me it's different because it's in MetaTalk instead of being on the front page, 'cuz it's all the same site.

Drivel is in the eye of the beholder.

Every time someone moves into MeTa to complain about the angry political threads, someone feels obliged to say "then don't read them". Same thing is true about the music/popculture/goofball threads. Don't like 'em, don't read 'em. Let MetaFilter be big enough to accommodate as wide a variety of subjects as the people who post them can make it.
posted by briank at 3:01 PM on July 12, 2001

Let MetaFilter be big enough to accommodate as wide a variety of subjects as the people who post them can make it.

Then why have it at all? Really. If it's a free-for-all, without any direction whatsoever, why bother? I mean, there's plenty of yahoo groups, aren't there?
posted by jpoulos at 4:08 PM on July 12, 2001

BrianK, all that other stuff is silliness and fun. We don't post it to the FRONT PAGE OF METAFILTER though, which is what this discussion is about: front page posts.

Meg's re-worded point is that perhaps we'd get better discussion is front-page posts were worded better. Do you care about having good discussion? If so, we should be discussing ways in which we can each do our part to encourage it. Surely a pancake here and there doesn't take away from that.
posted by daveadams at 4:40 PM on July 12, 2001

Then why have it at all? Really. If it's a free-for-all, without any direction whatsoever, why bother? I mean, there's plenty of yahoo groups, aren't there?

Easy, jpoulos: because you never know what you'll find on Mefi. Maybe it will be junk you couldn't care less about, maybe it will be the most fantastic site you've ever seen. Maybe you'll find out about a TV show you've never heard of. Yahoo groups don't fill that need. You'll get mostly just what the group is about and little more.

The other element that makes Mefi unique and great is the community. Thousands of people discussing any and every topic every day, sure, but it's the same thousands of people. There are definite personalities here and it makes for a strong community. There are lots of discussions that wouldn't be interesting in a yahoo setting but are made much more interesting with great input from a variety of people. And what's more, you can easily pick out the great comments because you know who you like and respect.

That's what community is all about. Mefi's a great one.
posted by daveadams at 4:43 PM on July 12, 2001

FROM CUJOE: MONITOR SPRAYING HUMOR-FREE POST AHEAD

At the risk of undermining my previous joke, I agree that the way in which posts are written make them more or less successful in terms of creating discussion. UNFORTUNATELY, threads are often redirected (derailed) by the fifth post anyhow, which reduced the overall effectiveness of that technique over the life of a longer thread. Back in the early days of MeFi, one of the things I worked hardest on was the "hook" - I figured if my titles were written Variety-Style they would entice the reader to get involved. I've played with the {fray}™ style ending on a question technique, but I guess I don't see any one style as a panacea.

Backing up still further, since one of the posts referenced in meg's original "REALITY TV BITES" comment had to do with an as-yet unbroadcast sequence where a contestant went bugshit and made a death threat (legit or not, it sounds very creepy) I think that makes it newsworthy. One of the things that fascinates me (though not enough to make me watch) about this type of show is that the producers try to drive the participants right up to the edge, without causing any real mayhem. How long before that mayhem happens? The Real World has been around for a decade, and I am AMAZED that nobody has died on it. I actually saw a bit of BB2, and the guy who pulled the knife gag looked like a whack job. Even those of us who are above this sort of programming are interested in the social implications. And by 'us' I mean 'me'.

Finally, I'd like to say that the picture of Matt in the Hatt nearly caused me to pee myself. What sort of things on Metafilter have caused you to pee yourself?
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 4:49 PM on July 12, 2001

That's what community is all about. Mefi's a great one.

Group Hug!
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 4:51 PM on July 12, 2001

Damn, I was reading this thread, and liking the part about how a well-written post sparks discussion, and then I went to the front of metafilter and caught this post (which I just deleted):

"The typo lives. I don't think the mileage will be as great as last time. Speaking of blasts from the past, does anyone know where I can find the story about the guy who was laid off on his first day? I thought I saw it on MeFi but the search tool can't find it."

no offense to the person that posted it, but that has to be the least discussion inducing post I could think of.

Someone could have just as easily posted:

"Hey go look at a site everyone's already seen before, and by the way, does anyone know where I left my keys?"

I suppose it's just the summer doldrums.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 5:25 PM on July 12, 2001

-HUMOR WARNING-

Option #1: Dredging:

Going through bookmarks you made months ago for something you tagged as interesting, but you didn't have time to read. Then deciding to read it later yet again.

Option #2: Seek Higher Ground

Refusing to take park in LCD threads, but responding to those cute high-altitude mountain kitty posts.

Option #3 Night Fishing

After spending the day at the beach and throwing back some brews, you are buzzing and feel a flame coming on for the next poor soul that breaks a posting guideline. Irony be damned! *belch*

Option # 4 Yard Work

I'm still thinking about this one.
posted by john at 5:42 PM on July 12, 2001

so, umm, have you seen my keys matt? =)

(and no, it wasn't me that made the aforementioned LCD post)
posted by mmanning at 7:46 PM on July 12, 2001

two words mike: couch cushions
posted by mathowie (staff) at 8:40 PM on July 12, 2001

Well, I posted this Big Brother thread, so I suppose I'm partly to blame. It links to a yahoo story as well, so it seems I'm doubly to blame. In my defense though, I've only posted 7 front page links in nearly a year.

And, while the post was ostensibly about Big Brother, the truth is that I don't give a whit about the show. I haven't watched it, and that wasn't why I posted it.

I was intrigued about people being cooped up with each other for so long that they are brought to the point of actual violence. I thought the post might spiral into a discussion of the nature of violence as a source of entertainment. Not so much is that good since violence = conflict which advances plot. However, to what levels can we take it and still view it as entertainment.

The tread actually ended up discussing the theory that much of the reality is actually highly staged which I think is timely and interesting given the seeming popularity of these shows.

posted by willnot at 9:23 PM on July 12, 2001

"I think Meg is saying keep the survivor/bigbrother/realworld talk confined to People Magazine, Entertainment Tonight, and TV Guide, and keep the regular non-mainstream press stuff coming."

You mean all that 'non-mainstream press' like Salon, and the NYTimes, CNN and Zdnet, which, between the 4 of them, make up a huge percentage of the links?

I am sure the New York Times will be thrilled to discover it is non-mainstream :) But seriously, there is a tonne of stuff here I have to scroll by - either because I have already seen it, or I have no interest in it - and I would invite other people to simply scroll by what they are not interested in.

The question remains, What is Metafilter? Is it:

A: A discussion site, with a spotlight shone on a link that then invites a broader question, rather than a discussion of the content of the link itself, or is it....

B: A public blog, where people can post links that they feel might be interesting to the group, and where discussion can focus specifically on the link's content?

"Now if someone were to post something about a reality TV show and then ask, "could you live with cameras pointed at you 24/7 in a house full of strangers?" I think it might be more interesting to follow the discussion."

It might be, but in that case, why even bother linking to a reality tv site? Why not just pose the question without it, if the question doesn't need a link attached to it in order to generate a discussion?

posted by kristin at 10:11 PM on July 12, 2001

kristin is dreamy.

*swoon*
posted by dangerman at 11:04 PM on July 12, 2001

C: A source for Scooby Do porn.

D: None of the above.

D. The link should be both interesting of itself and worthy of discussion....and perhaps link to an animation of the Mystery Van rocking rather, uh mysteriously.

posted by john at 2:07 AM on July 13, 2001

...all that other stuff is silliness and fun. We don't post it to the FRONT PAGE OF METAFILTER though, which is what this discussion is about: front page posts.

That's disingenuous, dave, and you know it. It wouldn't take much effort to find plenty of pancake/ice cream/zippity posts on quite a few front-page threads of late. Don't get me wrong, though, because I think the silly stuff is fine.

Really. If it's a free-for-all, without any direction whatsoever, why bother?

So just what IS the direction jpoulos? Daily left-vs-right troll wars? Hip A-lister web-design circle-jerking? Everybody Hates Aaron? Zippity-BOP!? Seems to me MeFi does fine with a pretty broad spectrum of topics. As long as you let several thousand people post links and don't vet them all (either by hand or via some mechanism a la Kuro5hin), that's what you're going to get.

And that's not a bad thing.
posted by briank at 6:43 AM on July 13, 2001

So just what IS the direction jpoulos?

What attracted me to MeFi was its blend of important, relevant posts--art, politics, science, etc.--and somewhat obscure "here's something you haven't seen". I'm not at all calling for MeFi to be the Intellectual House of Snobbery. Silly is great. Lowbrow is great. Let's talk about Monster Trucks! But I think there's nothing more obvious and boring than talking about "Reality TV".
posted by jpoulos at 8:13 AM on July 13, 2001

But that's right back at the same point, isn't it? Stick to the intelligent, relevant posts, ignore the "Reality TV" ones and you're right back where you want to be.

Are we worried that the "image" of MetaFilter would be hurt if people surfed by and saw...oh, the horror...posts about Survivor instead of kottke?
posted by briank at 8:45 AM on July 13, 2001

It's obviously time to for Matt to register "MetaFiltre," a community weblog for the discerning loudmouth.

^{This is an attempt at harmless humor, not a specific jab at anyone. I love you. You are snuggly.}
posted by Skot at 8:53 AM on July 13, 2001

HATE CRIME! SKOT IS ATTACKING MY VERY REASON FOR BEING!!!

Oh, and briank? I'm good with all those topics. That's why I love MetaFiltiere.

Also, I think we can talk about monster trucks, but definitely not Monster Truck Neutopians.

And, it's "Scooby Doo Porn" not "Scooby Do" - if you do it wrong, how will the search engines find you?

Also, I like scallion pancakes, even though they aren't really the same as pancake pancakes.

What is your favorite distant cousin to the pancake?
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 9:43 AM on July 13, 2001

Potato latkes.
posted by jennyb at 11:06 AM on July 13, 2001

I just want to say this:

Addressing the rise of these shows and the effect it's having on the social psyche wouldn't be so bad. Has technology crossed so many lines and given people the total feeling of isolation where people think they actually know these characters who happen to not be actors?

But unfortunately it is usually "did you see when that guy that that thing? Man, it rocked" a la the Chris Farley show from SNL.


posted by tj at 11:14 AM on July 13, 2001

but maybe I'm feeling a little smarmy today Friday the 13th and all.
posted by tj at 11:15 AM on July 13, 2001

What is your favorite distant cousin to the pancake?

a blini with caviar and sour cream is nice, so is a crepe with strawberry-cream cheese filling.


But unfortunately it is usually "did you see when that guy that that thing? Man, it rocked" a la the Chris Farley show from SNL.

So if this is the argument -- that the subject matter can be whatever strikes your fancy as long as the discussion is good -- I'm with ya, but if it's time to hold out our pinkies while we're eating our pancakes, I'm not.
posted by briank at 11:24 AM on July 13, 2001

And, it's "Scooby Doo Porn" not "Scooby Do" - if you do it wrong, how will the search engines find you?

As of this writing, I am the #16 Google match for Scooby Do porn. It shows up in my referrer logs with some regularity.

I'm so proud, honest I am.

posted by youhas at 12:12 PM on July 13, 2001

briank... I am the last one to suggest we all become snobs, and I'm not saying that I haven't done it at somepoint, but please have some sort of POINT when you post (yes, even if it's just to be silly)
posted by tj at 12:31 PM on July 13, 2001

please don't confuse the concept of 'populism' with the concept of 'successful marketing.'

thank you.

signed,
pedantic
posted by maura at 1:33 PM on July 13, 2001

See, we need to dominate all Scooby spellings!
posted by john at 1:43 PM on July 13, 2001

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments