Semi-self-link August 30, 2005 5:45 PM Subscribe
Not strictly a self-link, and not an entirely crappy FPP.
posted by Rothko at 5:56 PM on August 30, 2005
posted by Rothko at 5:56 PM on August 30, 2005
It was bad enough that Ollie had to know about Britney's wedding. Both of them. But then to have to watch her on television, happy with husband and the child meant to be his, a few crayolas had to fall out of his box. I forgive him.
Regardless, when I try to read the comments, my browser crashes
posted by Homeskillet Freshy Fresh at 6:00 PM on August 30, 2005
Regardless, when I try to read the comments, my browser crashes
posted by Homeskillet Freshy Fresh at 6:00 PM on August 30, 2005
I disagree with this deletion. owillis is a member of MetaFilter and he deserved to get his ass chewed out by such idiotic antics. We owe it to him, as snarky, uber-intelligent assholes to shame him into abandoning that shirt. If he were here to defend himself, he would agree that MetaFilter does serve a purpose in that regard. One doesn't have to look too far into his posting history on the blue to realize that he, too, chastises and mocks idiotic behavior.
All around, I say, "Booo!"
posted by SeizeTheDay at 7:42 PM on August 30, 2005
All around, I say, "Booo!"
posted by SeizeTheDay at 7:42 PM on August 30, 2005
sorry, that should read:
he deserved to get his ass chewed out because he engaged in such idiotic antics.
posted by SeizeTheDay at 7:45 PM on August 30, 2005
he deserved to get his ass chewed out because he engaged in such idiotic antics.
posted by SeizeTheDay at 7:45 PM on August 30, 2005
Actually, I think you got it right the first time, SeizeTheDay.
It was an ugly post.
posted by mcwetboy at 7:51 PM on August 30, 2005
It was an ugly post.
posted by mcwetboy at 7:51 PM on August 30, 2005
It was not a self link. I posted the link and I linked to dadahead, to whom I have no connection other than regularly reading their blog. I picked the story up from dadahead and would have posted it on metafilter a week ago but was not allowed to because I was too young a member. I posted a link on my own blog to dadahead and then posted it on metafilter at the earliest possible opportunity. I deliberately did not link to my own blog's mention of this issue because of the rules. It is true that dadahead later added a link to my blog's link to him at the bottom of his post, but that is rather like banning me for the fact that I put a comment on his original post. Sure, there is a convoluted route back to my blog but that was genuinely not the intention of this post. I would like to know how I could have informed people on metafilter of what I think was a pretty disgusting piece of political propaganda, possibly indicative of a lack of political backbone on the left, in any other way? Should I have avoided linking to dadahead from my own blog? If you look at all the comments I have made on metafilter since joining they are about Japanese relations. I feel really strongly about this Willis issue and that is why I did link to dadahead from my own blog. I feel the treatment of this post has been capricious and deprived metafilter members of information on what believe is an important issue. It certainly should not be dismissed as "a fairly crappy" link just because Willis is known to people here. Celebrating the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in party political propaganda is totally unacceptable and should be known about by as wide an audience as possible. I urge someone else to post about this issue. I have now found a two links that derived from dadahead's original post that do not mention my site at all (although both were informed of the issue by me and notice I did not point them in the direction of my blog either). Perhaps they can be posted by someone else on Metafilter. The later post does not even mention dadahead, which is a pity because it was dadahead who spotted this issue, but if the issue is to do with making sure noone ever clicks on my buyo site then it might do the job:
Site one
Site two
posted by chaschas at 8:54 PM on August 30, 2005
Site one
Site two
posted by chaschas at 8:54 PM on August 30, 2005
chaschas, you waited a full week to post a week-old story where you were a participant. So yes, by the letter of the law, it technically linked to the two blogs linked around you but the post itself didn't link to your site, but by the spirit of the law, you basically linked into your story.
Aside from that, it was a pretty flimsy excuse for a post. So a dude made a slightly offensive shirt. Big whoop.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:01 PM on August 30, 2005
Aside from that, it was a pretty flimsy excuse for a post. So a dude made a slightly offensive shirt. Big whoop.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:01 PM on August 30, 2005
Sorry, it is the first site that doesn't mention dadahead's original post.
posted by chaschas at 9:13 PM on August 30, 2005
posted by chaschas at 9:13 PM on August 30, 2005
"chaschas created a t-shirt being hawked in one of his links?
If that's not a self-link, what the fuck is?
posted by item at 5:34 PM PST on August 30 [!]"
And, for the hard of thinking, I did not create a t-shirt that is being hawked in one of the links. I made a satirical post that joked about a possible t-shirt. I do not really sell t-shirts. It really is absurd that that is the comment you link too in justifying the deletion (see link at the top of this thread).
posted by chaschas at 9:16 PM on August 30, 2005
If that's not a self-link, what the fuck is?
posted by item at 5:34 PM PST on August 30 [!]"
And, for the hard of thinking, I did not create a t-shirt that is being hawked in one of the links. I made a satirical post that joked about a possible t-shirt. I do not really sell t-shirts. It really is absurd that that is the comment you link too in justifying the deletion (see link at the top of this thread).
posted by chaschas at 9:16 PM on August 30, 2005
chaschas : "Celebrating the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in party political propaganda is totally unacceptable"
To split hairs: celebrating the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in party political propaganda is being accepted by some, so it is not true that it is unacceptable.
posted by Bugbread at 9:22 PM on August 30, 2005
To split hairs: celebrating the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in party political propaganda is being accepted by some, so it is not true that it is unacceptable.
posted by Bugbread at 9:22 PM on August 30, 2005
Oh, christ, bugbread. He's expressing the opinion that it's unacceptable. You really are getting tedious with the hair thing.
posted by mediareport at 9:25 PM on August 30, 2005
posted by mediareport at 9:25 PM on August 30, 2005
Celebrating the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in party political propaganda is totally unacceptable and should be known about by as wide an audience as possible.
Bad reason for a FPP, maybe. But the original material is an interesting link nonetheless, is no self-link to the poster (despite the dishonest stretch to make it into one), and the deletion is a poor one for those two reasons.
posted by Rothko at 9:26 PM on August 30, 2005
Bad reason for a FPP, maybe. But the original material is an interesting link nonetheless, is no self-link to the poster (despite the dishonest stretch to make it into one), and the deletion is a poor one for those two reasons.
posted by Rothko at 9:26 PM on August 30, 2005
chaschas, you waited a full week to post a week-old story where you were a participant.
I waited a week because I was not allowed to post because I was too young a member.
So yes, by the letter of the law, it technically linked to the two blogs linked around you but the post itself didn't link to your site, but by the spirit of the law, you basically linked into your story.
Read my comment above. I was not linking to "two blogs linked around you" or playing silly games with the "letter of the law". I was genuinely trying to publicise what I thought was an important post by dadahead. I did that through my own blog and I tried to do it through metafilter but have been stopped from doing so.
Aside from that, it was a pretty flimsy excuse for a post. So a dude made a slightly offensive shirt. Big whoop.
You obviously don't see it but the fact that Democrat activists are making t-shirts that boast about a mass killing is, in my and other people's opinion, a "big whoop", as you put it. It also says something important about the political climate in the US at the moment and about the crass and ill informed views about the nature of what was done in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. To be honest, I couldn't give a toss if people visit what is my personal blog, and I would like it if someone who did feel this was an important issue linked to one of the two links I suggested above, which don't mention my blog.
posted by chaschas at 9:30 PM on August 30, 2005
I waited a week because I was not allowed to post because I was too young a member.
So yes, by the letter of the law, it technically linked to the two blogs linked around you but the post itself didn't link to your site, but by the spirit of the law, you basically linked into your story.
Read my comment above. I was not linking to "two blogs linked around you" or playing silly games with the "letter of the law". I was genuinely trying to publicise what I thought was an important post by dadahead. I did that through my own blog and I tried to do it through metafilter but have been stopped from doing so.
Aside from that, it was a pretty flimsy excuse for a post. So a dude made a slightly offensive shirt. Big whoop.
You obviously don't see it but the fact that Democrat activists are making t-shirts that boast about a mass killing is, in my and other people's opinion, a "big whoop", as you put it. It also says something important about the political climate in the US at the moment and about the crass and ill informed views about the nature of what was done in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. To be honest, I couldn't give a toss if people visit what is my personal blog, and I would like it if someone who did feel this was an important issue linked to one of the two links I suggested above, which don't mention my blog.
posted by chaschas at 9:30 PM on August 30, 2005
mediareport : "You really are getting tedious with the hair thing."
Yeah, I should probably take a correction break. I'm starting to get annoyed that so many people are lazily using loaded emotional expressions, and then putting the responsibility of unloading the expressions on the reader (i.e. the "I dont' hvae to spel correctely, yuo can figuer out waht im saying" school of "writer makes reader do half the writer's job"). But in the absence of a big wave of MeTa threads by others about it, that probably doesn't mean that people are getting lazier, but that for some reason I'm just getting more sensitive. I shall bite my tongue.
posted by Bugbread at 9:34 PM on August 30, 2005
Yeah, I should probably take a correction break. I'm starting to get annoyed that so many people are lazily using loaded emotional expressions, and then putting the responsibility of unloading the expressions on the reader (i.e. the "I dont' hvae to spel correctely, yuo can figuer out waht im saying" school of "writer makes reader do half the writer's job"). But in the absence of a big wave of MeTa threads by others about it, that probably doesn't mean that people are getting lazier, but that for some reason I'm just getting more sensitive. I shall bite my tongue.
posted by Bugbread at 9:34 PM on August 30, 2005
I thought people got banned for self-linking? So why is this jackass still talking?
Metafilter is not your whore, pimp your shit somewhere else...
posted by Dreamghost at 9:38 PM on August 30, 2005
Metafilter is not your whore, pimp your shit somewhere else...
posted by Dreamghost at 9:38 PM on August 30, 2005
Dreamghost : "I thought people got banned for self-linking? So why is this jackass still talking?"
Because he didn't really link to himself? Just a guess.
posted by Bugbread at 9:39 PM on August 30, 2005
Because he didn't really link to himself? Just a guess.
posted by Bugbread at 9:39 PM on August 30, 2005
D'OH
On second look. Looks like i confused the buyo link on the third linked page as being a link on the post. Egg on my face.
I owe you a apology chaschas. even if you dont accept it.
I'm Sorry.
posted by Dreamghost at 9:49 PM on August 30, 2005
On second look. Looks like i confused the buyo link on the third linked page as being a link on the post. Egg on my face.
I owe you a apology chaschas. even if you dont accept it.
I'm Sorry.
posted by Dreamghost at 9:49 PM on August 30, 2005
"It certainly should not be dismissed as "a fairly crappy" link just because Willis is known to people here."
I didn't make the connection that Oliver Willis is mefi's willis. It was a crappy post simply for whining about some relative nobody's t-shirt sales site.
"It also says something important about the political climate in the US at the moment and about the crass and ill informed views about the nature of what was done in Nagasaki and Hiroshima."
Oh bullshit! tsk tsk
posted by mischief at 10:31 PM on August 30, 2005
I didn't make the connection that Oliver Willis is mefi's willis. It was a crappy post simply for whining about some relative nobody's t-shirt sales site.
"It also says something important about the political climate in the US at the moment and about the crass and ill informed views about the nature of what was done in Nagasaki and Hiroshima."
Oh bullshit! tsk tsk
posted by mischief at 10:31 PM on August 30, 2005
Oh you're all over-reacting. I'll see you after my nap.
posted by davy at 10:58 PM on August 30, 2005
posted by davy at 10:58 PM on August 30, 2005
Unless chaschas is Oliver Willis or the person who runs dadahead, this ain't a self link as far as I can tell.
posted by dabitch at 12:26 AM on August 31, 2005
posted by dabitch at 12:26 AM on August 31, 2005
I am certainly not either. And I remain "terminated".
posted by chaschas at 12:36 AM on August 31, 2005
posted by chaschas at 12:36 AM on August 31, 2005
this ain't a self link as far as I can tell
What she said.
posted by mediareport at 1:57 AM on August 31, 2005
What she said.
posted by mediareport at 1:57 AM on August 31, 2005
chaschas: Self-link or not, if you knew that Oliver Willis was mefi's owillis, then your post is no more than attacking another mefi member for his offsite content, which is no better than bringing a MeChat or #mefi grudge onto this site.
posted by mischief at 5:03 AM on August 31, 2005
posted by mischief at 5:03 AM on August 31, 2005
I did not know that Oliver Willis was owillis. However, I gathered that from the defensive reaction of some participants in the discussion and did a bit of name searching. As I have said, I genuinely thought I was drawing attention to something that needed light shone on it. I still think that and I think there is a bit of capriciousness going on. As for bearing some kind of grudge, I strongly disagree with Oliver Willis's actions and he has posted my comment on his site and left it there. I also carefully noted that he was "respected" in my post here and tried to leave out the pejoratives I used in my post on my own site (because I knew that this was a forum for lots of people rather than one person's view.) The only valued judgement I made in the comment was that it was "shocking". I put the counter argument with a link to Ron's post because I thought it was a fairly considered response. I was also careful to put Willis's own defence on the comment without negative comment from me. Willis has not backed away from that defence and so I don't see how bringing that to a wider audience with the small comment that I found it "shocking" is somehow bearing a grudge. My initial reaction to my being censored on this site was that I had not read the rules correctly and done something that was established as wrong. I am increasingly feeling that there is a bit of protecting one's own going on. Perhaps that is paranoid.
posted by chaschas at 6:27 AM on August 31, 2005
posted by chaschas at 6:27 AM on August 31, 2005
Owillis, that typeface you're using is ugly.
Also: that shirt is tacky as hell, brah.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 6:51 AM on August 31, 2005
Also: that shirt is tacky as hell, brah.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 6:51 AM on August 31, 2005
chaschas-calm down. It's all over and you can have a long and glorious time here at MetaFilter from here on out.
posted by OmieWise at 7:08 AM on August 31, 2005
posted by OmieWise at 7:08 AM on August 31, 2005
Doesn't look like a self-link to me, if what chaschas says is correct.
posted by languagehat at 7:48 AM on August 31, 2005
posted by languagehat at 7:48 AM on August 31, 2005
Wow, I was sure the buyo link was in the post. It appears it was not. My apologies.
posted by null terminated at 8:32 AM on August 31, 2005
posted by null terminated at 8:32 AM on August 31, 2005
Presumably, I will get "determinated" some time soon. Will the post get reinstated?
posted by chaschas at 9:12 AM on August 31, 2005
posted by chaschas at 9:12 AM on August 31, 2005
Presumably, I will get "determinated" some time soon. Will the post get reinstated?
No, and it sucks, but you can look forward to getting unfairly piled on repeatedly for it. My advice is to move on.
posted by Rothko at 10:09 AM on August 31, 2005
No, and it sucks, but you can look forward to getting unfairly piled on repeatedly for it. My advice is to move on.
posted by Rothko at 10:09 AM on August 31, 2005
sorry chaschas, it wasn't a direct self-link but the links you posted did have links in blog entries to your own blog, which confused a lot of people. Your blog is linked clearly in both posts, one of them quotes your post at length.
So like I said at first, you didn't break the letter of the law, but the spirit. Now, I don't want to split hairs on every post from now on, but when I thought about reinstating the post, I decided against it because it's a bit of a flimsy post, and is the kind of political junk I hate to see on mefi (like the "hannity said foo!" kinds of posts).
So sorry, I won't be putting it back, and you're not banned, so feel free to post again.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:33 AM on August 31, 2005
So like I said at first, you didn't break the letter of the law, but the spirit. Now, I don't want to split hairs on every post from now on, but when I thought about reinstating the post, I decided against it because it's a bit of a flimsy post, and is the kind of political junk I hate to see on mefi (like the "hannity said foo!" kinds of posts).
So sorry, I won't be putting it back, and you're not banned, so feel free to post again.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:33 AM on August 31, 2005
The guy who terminated me has said he was wrong!!??
posted by chaschas at 10:33 AM on August 31, 2005
posted by chaschas at 10:33 AM on August 31, 2005
My " said he was wrong" response was to Rothko rather than to mathowie. Mathowie is wrong about it being political junk. It was Willis's t-shirts that were political junk. The observation that political propaganda on the part of Democrat activists celebrating mass killing was inappropriate still stands. The observation that the political climate in the US seems to be pushing otherwise liberal people to such crassness still stands. The observation that Americans seem incredibly ignorant about their own country's actions, particularly as it relates to yellow people, still stands. However, I accept that the post is now in the past and I will move on.
posted by chaschas at 10:52 AM on August 31, 2005
posted by chaschas at 10:52 AM on August 31, 2005
I know you don't like it but celebrating killing 200,000 Japanese people is still not an appropriate piece of political propaganda, whether it makes you feel good or not.
posted by chaschas at 11:02 AM on August 31, 2005
posted by chaschas at 11:02 AM on August 31, 2005
No, chaschas, it is not at all appropriate. Does one blogger making inappropriate t-shirts make it interesting enough to be a metafilter post? No, not really.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:08 AM on August 31, 2005
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:08 AM on August 31, 2005
for pete's sake, ban him.
no1 gave you a pardon and you keep bitching, WTF?
posted by jmgorman at 11:22 AM on August 31, 2005
no1 gave you a pardon and you keep bitching, WTF?
posted by jmgorman at 11:22 AM on August 31, 2005
Reply to Mathowie:
I note a fairly lively discussion on this issue before it was terminated. A lot more lively than the posts around it. I also note a fairly lively discussion on this thread, with some people saying they did find it interesting despite the shrill assertions of others that it is not interesting.
Does one fairly respected Democrat activist advertising his wares as "Brand Democrat", with loads of people linking into his site, boasting about the killing of 200,000 people in Democrat branded goods say something about the nature of politics in the US today? Yes. Does it say something about some people's lack of real understanding about what it did in Nagasaki, Hiroshima (not to mention the killing of 100,000 civilians in one night a fire bombing of tokyo)? Yes.
I hesitate to link to this because I found it a perfectly decent subject for discussion, fairly presented, but a few days ago this link was posted, which is essentially about a bunch of nationalist nutters in Tokyo dressing up as WWII Japanese soldiers. Now, the truth is that these people represent no one at all in Japan and are seen as complete oddballs over here, and are certainly not part of such a powerful political force as the Democratic party is. This is somehow less "political junk" than mainstream Democratic party activists in the US advertising we love atomic bomb costumes. All I can say is that you are very US-centric if you think so.
posted by chaschas at 11:32 AM on August 31, 2005
I note a fairly lively discussion on this issue before it was terminated. A lot more lively than the posts around it. I also note a fairly lively discussion on this thread, with some people saying they did find it interesting despite the shrill assertions of others that it is not interesting.
Does one fairly respected Democrat activist advertising his wares as "Brand Democrat", with loads of people linking into his site, boasting about the killing of 200,000 people in Democrat branded goods say something about the nature of politics in the US today? Yes. Does it say something about some people's lack of real understanding about what it did in Nagasaki, Hiroshima (not to mention the killing of 100,000 civilians in one night a fire bombing of tokyo)? Yes.
I hesitate to link to this because I found it a perfectly decent subject for discussion, fairly presented, but a few days ago this link was posted, which is essentially about a bunch of nationalist nutters in Tokyo dressing up as WWII Japanese soldiers. Now, the truth is that these people represent no one at all in Japan and are seen as complete oddballs over here, and are certainly not part of such a powerful political force as the Democratic party is. This is somehow less "political junk" than mainstream Democratic party activists in the US advertising we love atomic bomb costumes. All I can say is that you are very US-centric if you think so.
posted by chaschas at 11:32 AM on August 31, 2005
"A pardon"!!! From "No1"!! Have I tresspassed into some kind of Year Zero, Big Brother world here? Take a look at yourselves.
posted by chaschas at 11:34 AM on August 31, 2005
posted by chaschas at 11:34 AM on August 31, 2005
Take a look at yourselves.
The worst of us look just like you, Dj Snooky-Snook-Snook.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 11:46 AM on August 31, 2005
The worst of us look just like you, Dj Snooky-Snook-Snook.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 11:46 AM on August 31, 2005
"Wherever we go, across the Pacific or Atlantic, we meet, not similarity so much as 'the bizarre'. Things astonish us, when we travel, that surprise nobody else." Miriam Beard
posted by chaschas at 11:55 AM on August 31, 2005
posted by chaschas at 11:55 AM on August 31, 2005
"Does one fairly respected Democrat activist advertising his wares..."
Where are you getting this "fairly respected" crap? He's just another idiot with a blog, as anonymous now as ever.
posted by mischief at 12:53 PM on August 31, 2005
Where are you getting this "fairly respected" crap? He's just another idiot with a blog, as anonymous now as ever.
posted by mischief at 12:53 PM on August 31, 2005
If you don't ban me, I swear I'm going to flame out on my own! I will! I'll do it! I mean it!
posted by OmieWise at 1:54 PM on August 31, 2005
posted by OmieWise at 1:54 PM on August 31, 2005
Wait, wait, wait, can we get back to Hannity saying "foo"? THERE'S a post I can get behind...
posted by mkultra at 1:55 PM on August 31, 2005
posted by mkultra at 1:55 PM on August 31, 2005
chaschas : "Now, the truth is that these people represent no one at all in Japan and are seen as complete oddballs over here, and are certainly not part of such a powerful political force as the Democratic party is. This is somehow less 'political junk' than mainstream Democratic party activists in the US advertising we love atomic bomb costumes. All I can say is that you are very US-centric if you think so."
"If you think a post about country A is interesting, but not a post about country B, then you are very B-centric".
That's quite an interesting construction.
posted by Bugbread at 6:43 PM on August 31, 2005
"If you think a post about country A is interesting, but not a post about country B, then you are very B-centric".
That's quite an interesting construction.
posted by Bugbread at 6:43 PM on August 31, 2005
Good logical analysis. Maybe "centric" was the wrong use of words. My point remains though: there seemed to be a lot of interest in completely unrepresentative nationalist extremists in Japan, as if they are somehow representative of the broad mass of people, but a post which talked about the extremism (extreme nationalism, extreme insensitivity??) of a mainstream democratic party activist was dismissed by some (not a majority) on this site as unrepresentative and irrelevant. A lot of people thought it was relevant.
posted by chaschas at 6:19 PM on September 3, 2005
posted by chaschas at 6:19 PM on September 3, 2005
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by mischief at 5:48 PM on August 30, 2005