Is anyone interested in helping to organize a MeFi Searchathon? [More inside.]
MetaFilter is an American weblog. Europeans here, whether British or continental, are mere tokens. Perhaps we should all give up the international pretense. The truth is that MetaFilter, for those of us not lucky (or, to be frank, unluckly) enough to live in the U.S. or Canada, is fast becoming a domestic concern with an ever-decreasing regard for what happens in the (enormous) rest of the world. Whereas (the few remaining) Europeans here are curious about America, Americans here seem boringly and predictably obsessed with themselves. Is isolationism the growing trend on this board? It certainly seems so. Say the word, by the way, and you can have it all to yourselves, no hard feelings.
It is not a good idea but it's a stone's throw away...
Is there any way we unfortunate non-Californians can help to ensure that MetaFilter becomes a 24-hour operation once more? [More inside.]
More than any other community weblog, MetaFilter
are associated with drunkenness and even alcoholism. This is an honest question: do most members here drink more than others/they ought to/than what's good for them? Is it OK to post while drunk, unless you really foul up? Is it considered funny or something? Why are there (comparatively) few other drugs extolled here? In sum, is MeFi quickly becoming MeFried?
I have mixed feelings about hoopyfrood's Michael Jackson belongs in jail
post. On the one hand, I agree with the general "don't editorialize" philosophy and its corollary "save it for a comment in the thread." On the other, this isn't exactly the New York Times and a poster's take on their subject is arguably an integral part of the post. "Letting the link speak for itself", when it involves a news item, is all very well - but perhaps keeping one's opinion out of the front page text is also an exercise in obfuscation and even dishonesty. Has current policy on editorializing changed? ( I speak as a frequent editorializer, I should add. Even though I agree "pedophile of pop", with its dubious inverted commas, and all-capitals IN JAIL!, as well as the idea that everyone is innocent until proven guilty except Michael Jackson, are way too extreme a way of going about it.
"This is MetaFilter, not NewsFilter, asshat"
: a delightful namecheck from the crucial, irrepressible Misanthropic Bitch
, echoing a worthy sentiment and a cause by now well lost. (Received by e-mail, with thanks.
Whatever happened to good old via? Lately attributions on MetaFilter have become rarer and rarer. Have we all suddenly started finding our own links the hard way or has the habit sadly declined?
Well, thanks a lot Wiki people for giving out my name as a MeFi in-joke
Perfidious sideblog-collapsers, please take note: Forbes Magazine
is holding a Best
Luxury Media Blogs Under $5 Poll
and MetaFilter is currently ahead, despite ferocious competition from the despicable opposition, i.e. the honourable Romenesko and bleedin' Gawker, no less. Can we win? Should we? Do we want to? [Do please check sideblog for the official communiqué.
It's easy to monopolize a thread when the subject is dear to one's heart. But it's difficult to gauge when one should resign and say "I'll shut up now". Cheerleading is annoying and thread-destroying. Although it's impossible to regulate posters' percentages and stuff, I'd like to hear other members' opinions on what constitutes the acceptable limit for commenting on one's own thread - considering that the moment you post it, it no more belongs to you than it does to anybody else.
Remember single-link posts?
A glance at the front page soon reveals they are now the exception rather than the rule. This is perhaps due to MeTa influence. You know: "Add a link or two for context/to show you care/as proof you can google". And yet great single-link posts, like this one
, are probably the most appealing and difficult to get right. Not least because I suspect most users will only click on what they assume is the main link. Have multi-link posts become the norm or are they just a passing trend?
Can the September jitters
, already being felt from all sides of the political table, be in any way lessened or avoided?
Mediareport hinted recently in his Russel Wright thread
that items from the media should be no more than starting-points for building an interesting post. Perhaps it might be useful to share research strategies, tactics, tricks and shortcuts for those who enjoy building out of the blue
front page posts. That is, those which aren't extracted or glossed from the news media or simply borrowed from existing weblogs.
How do people here go about googling, finding and selecting links? Does the idea for the post come first or do some people still go surfing in the raw, as it were, waiting for something interesting to turn up? And then build on it? Is there life outside Google? Are there any good online guides for direct research on the Web? Does haphazard, serendipitous, anarchic surfing yield worthwhile off-beat results or is it generally a waste of time?
Inexactly how much, numerically and psychologically, does a link on MetaFilter affect the traffic to the blog or web site referred? Is its effect transient or does it, so to speak, carry on? Also, just how many hits does MetaFilter get nowadays? [After reading stavrosthewonderchicken's interesting remarks on hits, pageviews and other popularity statistics and his comment on owillis's web site about how being linked on "The Mothership" makes traffic soar.
Piling on clavdivs; piling on riviera; piling on fold_and_mutilate; piling on stavrosthewonderchicken; piling on rodii; piling on evanizer; piling on rcade; piling on bluetrain; piling and unpiling; back and forth; predictably lashing and then cuddling; the pack mentality rife; the mob rule always subjacent... This is what MetaTalk looks like after two weeks away.
And yet... and yet MetaFilter is a joy to read. I'd wished personalities weren't made into issues at the cost of issues themselves - issues are, after all, what MetaFilter does best - but then it struck me that perhaps MetaTalk is fulfilling its role as a sort of blotter-paper, soaking up all the displaced aggressiveness and natural human attrition and rivalry. And keeping MetaFilter clean, so to speak. Is this perverse or healthy in a leeching, purging sort of way? So - can this be talked about without thinking it's about somebody or another? Has MetaTalk been efficiently used so that MetaFilter can be MetaFilter? Is it being dumbed down and fouled up? And does it matter if the result over in the blue seems so successful?
Someone sent me an email saying he hadn't any posting privileges and wanted to add his comment to a thread I'd started. I posted it by proxy. I now have severe misgivings, expressed in that thread
, reacting to mr_crash_davis's objection. What should I have done? The comment, by Thom Carlson, was intelligent and cogent and did provoke some lively responses. He's now sent me a second email, backing up his first comment.
I remember rebeccablood's thread about posting a link for someone and how most people felt it wasn't OK to do so. What about a single comment? Do the same principles apply? Please advise as I'm at a loss...
Remedies for over-posters urgently needed. Please bear with me and take the time to advise.
What's the policy on posting while under the influence of alcohol? Drunken posts
seem to have increased dramatically since September 11. I'm all in favour - it makes for great silliness and sincerity - but wonder if sober members find it as funny as I do. (Please don't flame; I paid yesterday!
A "take it to MetaTalk" and/or "take it to Email" buttonb below the Comment box? In the heat of the moment it would help to be reminded these options existed.