Every so often someone proposes we avoid discussion of unhappy outcomes in general but more specifically the unlikelihood of an impeachment in the Trump threads, which now appears to be becoming de facto policy. It seems like it's worth talking over before it does.
The biggest change in the way that mefites participate on the blue in years has been the rise of US politics megathreads. We have had several discussions of the qualitative impact of them, but it occurred to me that it might be useful to dig into the infodump and see what quantitative picture might emerge. I think my findings are worth sharing - while a quantitative analysis on its own can't tell us whether the megathreads are a good thing or not, there are several negative trends regarding community engagement and participation that are happening in close concurrency with the rise of the megathreads. [more inside]
We've gone back and forth in the election threads for over a year now. And plenty MeTa ink has already been spilled alternately bemoaning and re-litigating names for his Trumpiness, how annoying nicknames are, why some people want them, etc. etc. It's been recently argued that his name is already pretty silly for the English. From Lord Dampnut to , this topic seems done to death. Can we just settle this and put it in the damn wiki? Has it already been? Isn't this a better place than the unwieldy election threads?
Based on a lot of discussion over the last year and especially the last couple months about how the site handles the visibility and organization of posts about contemporary US politics, we've put together a new sidebar tool that you can test out starting today. [more inside]
Would it be possible to have a new Trump thread created once the previous one hits X posts? The current one, though only three days old, is well over 2000 posts and it's starting to make my desktop computer whimper. I'm not even going to try reading it on my iPad. Thanks!
Wanda: No. Not to me. To Archie. And make it good, or we're dead. It's been very politely brought to my attention that several of the links I've pointed to in the latest incarnation of the Great Trump Inaugural Thread had already been posted by others. I could blame the length of the thread & the loading time or whatnot but the truth is I haven't been as diligent in checking first as I should have been. I honestly feel quite bad about it & decided to make a post here as both penance for myself & reminder to others. I apologize to all & will make sure to check more thoroughly going forward.
I've spent the last eight years asking conservatives to refer to President Obama in respectful terms, because like him or not, he's the President of the United States of America. Now I get to ask liberals to refer to President-Elect Trump the same way. [more inside]
Back in January, on the eve of the Iowa caucuses, I set up an election prediction contest for you fine folks, and got 74 ballots in response. Nearly ten months (and ten million comments) later, the results are in: congratulations to Cash4Lead, for his remarkably far-sighted prediction of the winners of Iowa, New Hampshire, Super Tuesday, the nominations, the House majority, and even Clinton's VP pick! A $50 donation to the charity of your choice is yours. Oodles more analysis of the collective wisdom inside [more inside]
In the context of a discussion about Trump's hot mic tape, and whether this reflected common experience or not, I recently had a comment deleted. (I can't don't it in the thread or in my activity or recent favorites etc, so I assume it's gone.) [more inside]
I was surprised in the latest election thread to see that Donald Trump's "Grab them by the pussy" comment was bowderlerized when it was printed as a link to a video of the comment, but printed in full when a partial transcript of his remarks was reprinted. Is this something that's just at the disgression of the poster? Otherwise, I'd don't understand the inconsistency. (I think I understand the arguments for and against each method of handling Trump's vulgar language, but having both versions in a single post is puzzling.)
Can we have trump.metafilter.com, and put all Trump-related content there? That way, we know where to find it and where to avoid it. The rest of the world will thank us.
Stirring article about the organization that went into the Trump protest in Chicago. Was anybody we know there?
It's been an unbelievably unpredictable primary season this year, and the Iowa caucuses are less than 30 hours away. So why not get ahead of the curve with a TRUMP-SIZED election prediction contest? I'm thinking Iowa (Dem/GOP), New Hampshire (Dem/GOP), Super Tuesday (Dem/GOP), final nominee (Dem/GOP), and general election winner, with ties broken by House/Senate control, Veepstakes speculation, and as much analysis/rationalization/weeping as you feel appropriate. Prize: One (1) $50 ($fifty) donation to the charity of your choice (split equally if necessary), and eternal bragging rights over the ruins of the punditocracy. Deadline is 8:00 PM Eastern time Monday, when the caucuses start. (Feel free to enter after Iowa or New Hampshire vote, but be advised that your prediction for those states will not count!) See inside for entry form. [more inside]
It seems to me like there's been more than enough Trump stuff being FPP'd. I get the rubbernecking and trainwreck-watching urge, don't get me wrong, it's just feeling like there's kind of an excess. And I do also get that the US election next year is important, and the candidates are important. Still, maybe it's time to ixnay the umptray for a while? Thoughts?