MetaTalk

If a link has been posted and deleted, am I right to assume that reposting the link, even as a sub-link in a post leading on another link about the same thing, is a bad idea? [more inside]
posted by running order squabble fest on Jul 29, 2011 - 65 comments

An interesting aspect of the "filtration" on MetaFilter is chronological; and this aspect I think is often ignored, overlooked, or deprecated. [moronic inside]
posted by Eideteker on Jan 16, 2006 - 9 comments

A repost this may be, but it's highly worthy and should stay on the front page, because the chap has made more 'critters' since I last saw the site, and I very much appreciate being reminded of it, and for flip's sake, it was last posted in 2002.

[more inside]
posted by chrid on Sep 27, 2004 - 21 comments

Double-posts leak in. (1, 2)
posted by insomnyuk on Oct 16, 2003 - 42 comments

So I'm guessing that we've adopted a new unwritten policy on doubleposts?
[example, example, example]
posted by crunchland on Sep 10, 2003 - 14 comments

Why is it necessary to point out to an author, that something that they posted and is being discussed, may have been talked about a year ago? I see this at least 4 - 5 times a week. Point in case today. I personally think this very rude, and falls under the "If you don't have anything productive to say, don't say anything at all" rule. Am I then only one who feels this way?
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood on Aug 22, 2002 - 15 comments

Seeing this thread regarding the hoary old chestnut (you know, back in 2000) of Steve Albini vs. The Music Biz and Courtney Love ripping him off begs the question:

Is there a statute of limitations on double-posts?

Since TiggleTaggleTiger is a new user (May 2001), should he get cut slack? What if a newbie - new to the Web, new to MeFi - posts this link to a great site he found called fray.com? What's the correct procedure here?
posted by solistrato on Nov 30, 2001 - 11 comments

enough with the smug MEFI reverse posting, already! We're all very proud that you're such a dedicated metafilter reader, but so what if someone starts a new thread about an old topic, especially if the thrust of the post is different?!

posted by crunchland at such-and-such a time on January 27

Well there seems to be a problem with to much noise around here and with the new sort feature (upper right hand corner of the home page) there really is little need to post a new topic.

Yes, this should be in MetaTalk but no one ever goes there.

posted by Mick at 5:57 AM PST on January 27


The topic is not old. The specific link came up like a week ago. Most all that was said was said about 'IT', maybe wait until something new comes out? If that jaguar/baylink post was inappropriate, this certainly is too.

posted by tiaka at 7:43 AM PST on January 27


crunchland wrote: enough with the smug MEFI reverse posting, already! We're all very proud that you're such a dedicated metafilter reader, but so what if someone starts a new thread about an old topic, especially if the thrust of the post is different?!

You could not be more wrong on this, crunch. It is everybody's responsibility to do a MeFi search for a link before posting it to the front page. This is a "self-policing" community, in case you did not know that, and the people (like myself) who point out when people make mistakes like redundant posts to the front page are merely doing their duty as MeFi citizens, not being smug or trying to impress anyone with how carefully they read this site. This message needs to go out to everybody, but Mick is right that the conversation would be better held in metaTalk.

posted by ericost at 8:07 AM PST on January 27

posted by crunchland on Jan 27, 2001 - 19 comments