One WTC thread a day September 25, 2001 5:44 AM   Subscribe

Since the large number of WTC threads is pissing off our leader, why don't longtimers post related comments and links only in the first WTC thread of the day and let the others disappear from our consciousness as quickly as that Live WTC tribute song?
posted by rcade to Etiquette/Policy at 5:44 AM (18 comments total)

Second that.
posted by lia at 7:42 AM on September 25, 2001

A very good idea. Each day, someone can create a "WTC: Day x" thread, and everyone can go there for all their terrorist needs. It would clear up the front page pronto.
posted by Doug at 7:52 AM on September 25, 2001

I like. I've been avoiding the WTC threads anyway, but do support this idea. Hopefully, people will eventually figure out to just put their links under the one thread.

*giggles over "terrorist needs"*
posted by Su at 8:09 AM on September 25, 2001

I nominate the Nobel Peace Prize for Bush thread as today's WTC discussion. Is there a second?
posted by rcade at 8:27 AM on September 25, 2001

As I mentioned scant seconds ago on that very thread :



(feebly waves hand to indicate secondment)
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:32 AM on September 25, 2001

How long do you have to be around to be an "oldtimer"?
posted by UncleFes at 9:45 AM on September 25, 2001

Your user ID has to be under 218.
posted by gleemax at 9:49 AM on September 25, 2001

I think this is a great Idea too. (capital I on purpose) How can we make sure that eveyone complies?
posted by tj at 9:59 AM on September 25, 2001

We don't need everyone on board. Just the nuts who show up in MetaTalk would be enough to starve out the other WTC threads.
posted by rcade at 10:20 AM on September 25, 2001

Speaking as one of the aforementioned nuts, I hereby swear to comply.

Oh, and not to throat-punch the ex-military guys at my work who keep sending me Dubya propaganda produced by people with less-than r33t PhotoShop skills.

But I can't say how long the throat-punching thing will hold.

"we're not hitchhiking anymore.......we're riding!"
posted by Kafkaesque at 11:01 AM on September 25, 2001

Why can't the thread automatically appear at the day change? Perhaps a title like -- "The WTC repercussion thread for (and the date)." then everything gets posted there -- I posted something just now which I thought ws valid and interesting, but the usual Mefi naysayers shouted me down -- perhaps if I'd had somewhere to put it for actually interested parties...
posted by feelinglistless at 12:50 PM on September 25, 2001

I think you are onto a good thing there, listless. It would be like a WTC repository. All the links would go in there. That way, you no wanna WTC, you no getta WTC. It would also get rid of this nagging feeling I have that some are racing not to inform their fellow MeFiers, but just to be first. Reminds me of the gleam in a certain CNN anchorwoman's eyes when she talks about the casualties.
posted by Kafkaesque at 1:08 PM on September 25, 2001

Why can't the thread automatically appear at the day change?

Because that would involve new work for Matt, while the other way just involves a little self-discipline among a crowd of people who demonstrate, in their contributions to MetaTalk, that they crave discipline.
posted by rcade at 1:13 PM on September 25, 2001

Correct "their" to "our." I craves it too.

I'm trying to convert Postroad to our side. If you are friends with him or anyone else who is making lots of baby Sept. 11 discussions, please make with the persuasion.
posted by rcade at 1:34 PM on September 25, 2001

How about, if the first person on any given day wants to post a WTC link for discussion, he/she writes the main page post to say sthing like, "That WTC thing. More inside." -- and then posts his/er link as the first comment?

Then subsequent links could also be added as comments; if the first link sucks, no big deal. And no big deal for being there at midnight, either. At least, I wouldn't care.
posted by mattpfeff at 1:38 PM on September 25, 2001

Yes -- that's sounds like a better idea -- lets do that -- we really don't to give Matt any more grief...
posted by feelinglistless at 1:55 PM on September 25, 2001

better scalability for any unforeseen crisis that has yet to unleash itself on humanity.
posted by tamim at 5:18 PM on September 25, 2001

tamin, that is a good idea.

ominous, but good.
posted by th3ph17 at 6:12 PM on September 25, 2001

« Older Didn't I already read this?   |   Exposure is the only compensation I can offer you Newer »

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