Douple post from comment to FPP? September 25, 2001 1:01 PM   Subscribe

is a post that includes a link previously posted in a thread, but not on the homepage, a double-post?
posted by o2b to Etiquette/Policy at 1:01 PM (30 comments total)

it could be subjective, but for the most part, I say no.
posted by o2b at 1:02 PM on September 25, 2001

In the case of the tin-foil hat thingy, I believe that would fall under the category of a link that most members are likely to have already seen.
posted by Kafkaesque at 1:04 PM on September 25, 2001

Technically no, but:

A. What Kafkaesque said.
B. Making a more lenient Metafilter your "crusade" kinda misses the point about what's going on around here. We need to enforce the rules more strictly, not less so.
posted by jpoulos at 1:05 PM on September 25, 2001

I believe that would fall under the category of a link that most members are likely to have already seen.

Not sure how people are supposed to know that. I'm on the internet constantly and saw it for the first time today. Sorry if I was unable to intuit that others would have seen it.

We need to enforce the rules more strictly

Then I need to try and stay away more often. I was unaware that over-tolerance was a problem around here.
posted by kd at 1:22 PM on September 25, 2001

I'm with jpoulus. Plus, it's not like I ripped kd a new a-hole. I've had Matt delete a post on me before, totally my fault, but I sure won't double post again. Isn't that the point of the 'self policing'? To train members to be 'good' members?

If your point is whether or not this is a double post, I have added another link that was in a discussion from March as the first reply. It's not a front page post true, but it is repetitive.

Ok, just read kd's post, now I just feel like a meanie. C'mon kd. Stay and play.
posted by jasonshellen at 1:31 PM on September 25, 2001

Sorry if I was unable to intuit that others would have seen it.

Hey man, I wasn't trying to be a jerk or anything. Easy on the sarcasm.

kd...there have been a bazillion discussions around here lately about what to do about the signal v noise ratio. It seems like one way to reduce it is to be stricter about deleting questionable posts like yours, that fall into a grey area of maybe-double-post, maybe-too-common. I don't think there is anything personal at all in people wanting to keep the front page uncluttered.

Obviously you didn't know about this link before, which of course goes to show that not all members have seen it.

I think also one of the byproducts of this stricter policing would be that people who are offended at having their posts deleted would leave. That way, there are less members and subsequently less posts.
posted by Kafkaesque at 1:33 PM on September 25, 2001

I live in fear of double-posting. That's why I don't really post too many links. Well, that and I'm not that smart.

I do have to say that the treatment for those who commit this vile act has gotten much more friendly here though. It use to be "you suck, you double poster you, cretin", now it's just "ahem, errr, duuuude, look here, BTW you suck :) " .

It happens all the time on these links that no one has ever posted before. It's the internet, it happens.

posted by remlapm at 1:37 PM on September 25, 2001

Well, that's a damn good idea. Less members.

Deleting it, that would be fine. I would *so* rather have something embarrassing disappear, rather than to continue to be embarrassed about it. This, has got me fairly upset. Why? Maybe I'm a little too fragile to be playing over here. However, this place *is* more addictive than crack, and I've really been trying not to post stuff, because I fear looking stupid (for damn good reason, obviously) so I emailed Matt to ask him to delete my user account, because I'm a bad addict and if I can post things, I probably will.

See? I'm still posting stuff. Somebody, please, delete me.
posted by kd at 1:38 PM on September 25, 2001

*Much of what I'm about to say is repeating others' comments above, but i wrote it before i saw them, so I'm going with it :-)

kd: please don't take it personally. everyone double-posts at one time or another. when we do, someone else points it out. that's all.

you did a search and didn't find it. then it's not your fault.

It's a self-policing community, and lately a lot of front-page space has been taken up with bad posts (double posts that a search would have caught, for example). A lot of people think that more vigilant self-policing is necessary, hence, my point about enforcing the rules. If someone is going to arguing that the rules are being enforced too strictly, they're probably not going to find a lot who agree with them. (At least not here in MeTa.)
posted by jpoulos at 1:41 PM on September 25, 2001

Dammit, Matt, don't delete her! It's a great link, except that it had been noted before. We need more members who post good links, and who won't flip the bird to the community if they post in error.

Besides, if I'm going to spend my life addicted to this site, I want plenty of others to go down with me. :-)
posted by jpoulos at 1:44 PM on September 25, 2001

Listen, kd. I'd like to stop if I'm making you feel attacked. I don't think anyone here thinks you're stupid.

Please, though, try not to respond with sarcasm. [Well, that's a damn good idea. Less members]

This is a hard time for everyone. I think everyone is a little more prone towards defensiveness. Sometimes this forum can make people feel ganged up on. I certainly didn't mean to come across that way.

Now c'mere and give me a big hug, you goofball you.
posted by Kafkaesque at 1:45 PM on September 25, 2001

It shouldn't have been posted because of the general commonality of the link, not because it was an obscure comment link. I know it's already been said but I'd like to reinforce it.
posted by geoff. at 1:46 PM on September 25, 2001

[sniff] I keep making people quit. :-(
posted by jpoulos at 1:52 PM on September 25, 2001

I believe that a pointer to a previous discussion on a subject, whether meant as a rebuke (and if jasonshellen's "ahem" was a rebuke, it was an admirably mild one) or not, is a good idea as a general principle. Even if a new discussion of something is worthwhile, I don't see providing a link to the ideas that were expressed before as a bad thing.

But I do get tired of the overdramatic "Oh, I'm being persecuted, I'm going to go away and cry" schtick.
posted by harmful at 2:01 PM on September 25, 2001

Sorry if anything I said was overdramatic or sarcastic, I guess what's happening to me today is I've been on cruise control for the past two weeks, for the obvious reasons, and for some personal reasons above and beyond that. For some reason, today, at *least* five things I've seen or heard here or there, have got me started, yes, actually crying. This is a temporary situation and I'm sorry some of it happened here. Tell you what: let's forget this all ever happened (except the part where I remember to really, thoroughly search for prior instances of links or similar threads, that I will remember), I'll stop whining, & will someone please go delete the post that started all this?
posted by kd at 2:41 PM on September 25, 2001

/passes out sheets of aluminum foil to everyone

it seems lately that there's a bigger thing happening here on MeFi than just frequent double posts and attempted corrections/scoldings. i'm seeing a bit of a trend by older (been here longer) and other, more enthusiastic members of post-moderation, that is, moderation after the posting. i appreciate the concept of self-policing, but the old question of "who's watching the watchmen" seems to be arising more frequently as the membership numbers advance into 5 digits, in combination with increased disputed double posts by newer members. maybe it's time to start considering a volunteer board of moderators or proof-readers and fact checkers? i for one appreciate the efforts of other members in reducing the amount of noise on the site, especially if it decreases page load times. i also like the concept of grafting threads when there are redundant posts made... if you view the front page by recent comments, even old links/stories show up if there are new comments.

with regards to double-posts, i only read the comments of the links i'm interested in... so it's unlikely that I'll read the comments and even less likely that i'll see a link added as a comment to a link/story that doesn't interest me. so, if a link from a previous comment makes it to front page status (either by error or enthusiasm), chances are good that to me it's a 'new' link. still doesn't mean i'll read it though, unless the 'new' topic grabs my attention.

/goes back to eyeing his furniture suspiciously
posted by mb01 at 2:57 PM on September 25, 2001

/makes tinfoil hat for self and little girl next to him

gotta say, you guys are too cool. (Even you, jpoulos. :) ) Even the hardliners here are aware of what they say and no one wants to hurt anyone -- and that is too rare. Sniff. What an awesome place.

Anyway, given MeFi's sheer size, such semi-double posts are likely to be valuable to those who haven't seen all the threads. But at the same time, they just make the size problem worse.

This is one place more active moderators could be a help -- someone who has some authority to say, damn, that link in that comment is so cool (or rare, etc.) we should pull it out and make a new thread. Otherwise, just gotta deal, and be nice to people who make innocent mistakes.
posted by mattpfeff at 3:40 PM on September 25, 2001

Well, skallas, I appreciate your support, but I'm not sure I'd go quite that far. In this instance, I should have tried "tinfoil hat" at least, but what puzzles me is that I did type (what I thought was) the exact text of the first duplicate link in the comments. A typo? I should have checked more than one thing.

However I was moved by the urgency to let people know about this - I myself had no tinfoil handy here at work and was forced to construct a hat out of empty Mountain Dew cans -- ouchie! I was just trying to be helpful, honest I was.
posted by kd at 4:14 PM on September 25, 2001

I personally think that posting a link found in a previous comment is almost as bad as posting one which appeared on the front page.

There may be exceptions though, so I think that this is one of those gray areas that we love on Mefi so much.

And for your enjoyment, a little Patsy Cline:

Please delete me, let me go
For I don't love Mefi any more
To waste a post would be a sin
Delete me and let me read again.

I have found a old link here
which makes this one a double, dear
I can't stand to hear the geezers scold
Delete me, mathowie, let me go.

Please delete me, can't you see
You'd be a fool to cling to me
My comments would just bring Mefi pain - so
Delete me and let me read again.

posted by fooljay at 5:42 PM on September 25, 2001

We've got so many posts about double posts here in Metatalk, that I don't even know where to post this one...

Isn't the Gartner post is ridiculous, seeing as we just talked about it the other day...

I mean, what, are we going to post another link each time a company decides, based on Gartner's opinion, to swicth away from IIS?

posted by fooljay at 6:07 PM on September 25, 2001

Good lord. One little 'ahem' and i made someone cry? I do that enough in the offline world.

For the time being, I am removing my MeFi Police badge and putting myself on administrative leave until the internal affairs dept calls a hearing.
posted by jasonshellen at 7:20 PM on September 25, 2001

It wasn't the "ahem" that did it, it was all the stuff that followed, after I apologized and started feeling foolish, & it just kept getting worse, and I felt more and more foolish as I fed fuel to the flames, which were quite mild, as flames go, and I should stop rambling now.

A nice Patsy Cline rendition of "Crazy" would be appropriate now. I'm really not all that much of a nutjob on my better days, but this wasn't one of those.
posted by kd at 10:30 PM on September 25, 2001

Gratuitous contrived-double-post snitch snark.
posted by Opus Dark at 12:03 AM on September 26, 2001

note also today's Starbucks thread, which was also posted in the Onion thread of last night.

I don't like the Starbucks thread (I don't think it's all that interesting that some store manager, seeing $130 walk out the door and not knowing what was going on, didn't know what to do), but this seems to be one case where people had opinions they wanted to share, and creating a new thread was preferable to having those opinions dumped into the original.
posted by mattpfeff at 9:58 AM on September 26, 2001

With deepest apologies to Willie Nelson and Patsy Cline's family....

Crazy (for Mefi)

Crazy, I'm crazy for letting you scold me
I'm crazy, crazy for linking for you
I knew, you'd comment as long as I posted
But then one day, I did and it made me so blue.

Worry ... why do I let myself worry?
Wonderin' ... what in the world did I do?
Oh, crazy ... for thinkin' that my post would hold you
I'm crazy for tryin', and crazy for cryin'
And I'm crazy for linking for you

Crazy ... for thinkin' that my post could hold you
I'm crazy for tryin', and crazy for cryin'
And I'm crazy for Mefi, it's true
posted by fooljay at 11:49 AM on September 26, 2001

Woo ... ! [clap ... clap]
posted by sylloge at 11:58 AM on September 26, 2001

who let the filk writers in?
posted by moz at 1:21 PM on September 26, 2001

umm...what's a filk writer?

thanks for the song, fooljay, that was too cool.
posted by kd at 2:58 PM on September 26, 2001

great job people!!

[clap clap]

time for cookies!!
posted by o2b at 5:44 PM on September 26, 2001

"You're a loose cannon, jasonshellen! You're off the case!"
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:53 PM on September 26, 2001

« Older Exposure is the only compensation I can offer you   |   Spam? In *my* MetaFilter? Newer »

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