Self-linking is a no-no

December 26, 2005 12:56 PM

Self Link. This is the first FPP by .:DataWhat?:. which was preceded by three comments. Two of them reference the all music website in this FPP. Going to the user's own blog shows a preponderance of posts regarding the user's direct involvement with this all music place.
posted by ooga_booga to Etiquette/Policy at 12:56 PM (48 comments total)

DEATH TO THE INFIDEL!
posted by mr_crash_davis at 1:01 PM on December 26, 2005

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN
posted by kcm at 1:09 PM on December 26, 2005

This post in the DataWhat's blog is more explicit :

Tapestry is intended to be a Business-To-Business service, so I don't see it being used on the AllMusic.com site anytime soon, but it could be a powerful back-end for any company that wants to provide some really dynamic intelligent playlisting.

This is a project that I've personally been involved with for a long time, and I'm really excited by the quality of the results we are seeing. It's been hard for me not to shout this from the rooftops, and hopefully by mid-January there will be some good buzz about it.
(bold emphasis mine)
posted by ooga_booga at 1:09 PM on December 26, 2005

*passes out torches*
posted by killdevil at 1:13 PM on December 26, 2005

From the "AMG relaunch an unarguable success" post:
It doesn't work well with non-Internet Explorer Browsers.
Warning! Personal Opinion to Follow!
Hmmm...I just don't see what they're talking about. Maybe they should just use IE like 87% of the rest of the world.
To me that's like owning a diesel car and then complaining that your local Amoco doesn't have diesel.
posted by kenko at 1:16 PM on December 26, 2005

So, we had to pick the most widely used browser by our users (over 87%) to optimize the site for and then work on compatibility issues with the other major browsers as we go forward.

Or you could write standards-compliant code and fix for IE bugs.
posted by kcm at 1:26 PM on December 26, 2005

Maybe they should just use IE like 87% of the rest of the world.

Self-link and and IE appeasement? Kill him.
posted by TimeFactor at 1:27 PM on December 26, 2005

It's been hard for me not to shout this from the rooftops

heheh
posted by scarabic at 1:37 PM on December 26, 2005

Seriously. I can live with a self-link, but this let's just code for IE shit is unforgivable. Mother Fucker.
posted by chunking express at 1:37 PM on December 26, 2005

A self-linking IE snob. If he/she only drives an SUV, the trifecta would be complete.
posted by yhbc at 1:39 PM on December 26, 2005

got it.
posted by jessamyn at 1:55 PM on December 26, 2005

aw, there won't be a lynching?
posted by Cranberry at 2:30 PM on December 26, 2005

Awwww but I wanted to explode!
posted by loquacious at 2:45 PM on December 26, 2005

Yeah, I was going to say that this seems like somewhat of an innosent mistake. It could have been posted to projects, and if it's as good as he says it is, it could have been posted to the blue.

However, he's an IE-only proponent? And it only works in IE? In that case, I mean, most of us probably wouldn't even be able to use the site anyway. I say off with his head!
posted by Paris Hilton at 3:09 PM on December 26, 2005

It's a good thing I was drunk when I commented on that thread.
posted by SmileyChewtrain at 3:14 PM on December 26, 2005

Fucking shitstain. Sucked me in.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:31 PM on December 26, 2005

So is this guy going to be banned or not? Now that we have projects we might want to give him the opportunity to redeem himself.

On the other hand, it's pretty clear he was only interested in using this site to self promote. Should projects be restricted to 'good faith' long-standing members?
posted by Paris Hilton at 3:37 PM on December 26, 2005

By the way, this seems to happen every week or so. It's not too big of a problem, but perhaps the most recent one or two month users should get a BIG warning that they are not supposed to self-link. I imagine we might be losing a handful of members with the potential for greatness.
posted by Paris Hilton at 3:39 PM on December 26, 2005

They can always reup for another $5 if they want to be great. The no self link is pretty clear cut, not hard to understand. The fellow was itching to fpp this as his perquisite comments suggest. I think he knew what he was doing and got caught early.
posted by edgeways at 3:45 PM on December 26, 2005

Got me. I am accused and guilty.

However, it has been a group project a bunch of people have been working on for years and like the overanxious music nerd that I am, I wanted to get the word out to as many folks as possible.

I have also become an ardent supporter of Firefox in the year-and-a-half since I made that post. Nice research though.

As far as the "Let's kill the motherfucker for only coding in IE" goes, well, the whole thing functions fine in Firefox, except for a bug that just showed up in Firefox 1.5 that was released three weeks ago (when you launch a sample, the asx file launches in another window, effectively 'whiting-out' the window you're in).

The self-link however is inexcusable. Being the Metafilter fan that I am, I won't darken this door again.

Apologies.
posted by Overzealous at 4:08 PM on December 26, 2005

An apology AND another five bucks. I say we let him stay.
posted by yhbc at 4:22 PM on December 26, 2005

Okay. Let's let him stay.

And never, ever trust him again.
posted by interrobang at 4:32 PM on December 26, 2005

Overzealous, if you had just put it in Projects all this could have been avoided. tisk
posted by edgeways at 4:36 PM on December 26, 2005

All right, I'm provisionally downgrading him to a 'goldarned poopsmear', based on a presumably sincere apology.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:40 PM on December 26, 2005

...and an amusing handle for the replacement account.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:40 PM on December 26, 2005

*immediately wonders if this is a bad if unaviodable precedent, though -- many site admins would gladly pay five bucks for a throwaway account to create the visibility that MeFi brings*
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:42 PM on December 26, 2005

got it.

Meaning the account's been banned, right? Sorry, but it wasn't clear.

The self-link however is inexcusable.

Oh, please. Then why'd you do it?
posted by mediareport at 4:55 PM on December 26, 2005

Meaning the account's been banned, right?

Right, both.
posted by jessamyn at 5:00 PM on December 26, 2005

If he apologizes does that mean I have to stop feasting on his entrails and give them back?

Damnit, I'm hungry.
posted by loquacious at 5:08 PM on December 26, 2005

I wanted to get the word out to as many folks as possible

Yeah, fuck you too.
posted by cillit bang at 5:18 PM on December 26, 2005

While I find the Straightforward Apology and Funny New Username appealing, I note that he makes no Pretense of Ignorance - which would be Difficult to Swallow from someone with Posts from a Year and a Half ago.

I Fear our General Predisposition to Forgiveness given an Abject and Remorseful Apology will begin to be Ill Used by Cunning Self Linkers.
posted by freebird at 6:33 PM on December 26, 2005

(Self-link) me once, can't get (self-link)ed again....
posted by blue_beetle at 6:56 PM on December 26, 2005

Take that apology and stuff it. Joining just to post a self link does not a "fan of Metafilter" make. You've been reading Metafilter from at least September 2004 and you love this place so much you join up just to pimp your site? Pony up all the $5 sign-ups you want, but I would rather never see any more links made on this site to any domain related to you and yours.
posted by ooga_booga at 6:57 PM on December 26, 2005

Yeah, fuck you too.

*laughs* Yes, folks, that *is* the only response to a post-self-link apology at Mefi.
posted by mediareport at 6:58 PM on December 26, 2005

And in case it isn't clear, it's my humble opinion that Overzealous (and any other account from his IP) needs to be banned forfuckingever. It couldn't be more obvious that sleazy fuckheads calculating that it's a bargain to pay $5 for a hefty hit surge are going to be one of MeFi's major problems in 2006. Anyone can see it's only going to get worse, and that anything short of a completely unforgiving response to the *person* (not just that account) is ineffective.

Overzealous was stupid enough to let us all know he's the same person who knowingly shat on the site. To leave his new account active is a message that MeFi doesn't take self-linking seriously - about as clear a message as you can imagine. Please, at the very least, let's not allow assholes to publicly announce that they got away with it. Ban Overzealous now, before the rush.
posted by mediareport at 7:07 PM on December 26, 2005

Make new accounts $20. Many problems, including this one, go away. And Matt can buy us some new ponies.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:58 PM on December 26, 2005

I actually agree with stavros here. $20 is not that much, and it would solve a lot of problems.
posted by interrobang at 8:01 PM on December 26, 2005

I actually agree with stavros

Is that such a rarity? Hmmph harrumph.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:05 PM on December 26, 2005

And free accounts for the third world.

Do I interpret the above that the new "Overzealous" account got banned as well? That doesn't seem fair, and wouldn't promote contrition, etc.
posted by Rumple at 8:08 PM on December 26, 2005

I don't think it's quite fair to pay $5 to get back on a site that you've been banned from. What does banned mean?
posted by kjh at 8:13 PM on December 26, 2005

I don't think it's quite fair to pay $5 to get back on a site that you've been banned from. What does banned mean?

The approach that Lowtax and his admins at the SA forums has developed over the years is an interesting one, and one that makes him a freakin' bucket of money, I'd reckon.

It ranges from probations (for infractions ranging from the reasonable to the slightly puzzling or just LOLtastic, sometimes) of various length, to bannings (which happen all the damned time, and after which the bannee can drop 10 bucks to get back in), to permabanning. Not sure how that last works, but I guess it's an IP address thing.

Just as a data point. Not suggesting we need anything like that, nor would Matt want to manage it, I don't think. There are a lot more 14-year olds at SA (although sometimes lately it's hard to tell *rimshot*).
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:31 PM on December 26, 2005

"Banned" apparently means "Out $5."
posted by jasonlatshaw at 8:33 PM on December 26, 2005

You're banning some guy for self-linking to AMG? I mean I hate self-link as much as the next jerk, but that's like banning a guy a who links to and works at google.
posted by drpynchon at 8:47 PM on December 26, 2005

that's like banning a guy a who links to and works at google.

Now I'm confused. If someone who worked at Google posted a link to a Google project they'd worked on to the front page, why shouldn't they get banned? What's your argument here again?
posted by mediareport at 9:10 PM on December 26, 2005

from stav's link "Hellban - Unlike a standard ban, a hellban is not announced to anyone. It makes a user's posts and replies invisible to other users of the forums; this is usually to stop users who post a lot with little or no content from being seen."

This sounds very interesting.
posted by dhruva at 9:43 PM on December 26, 2005

Sorry, my bad, mediareport. I didn't notice he was linking to a sub-project at AMG. Let the slow painful execution recommence.
posted by drpynchon at 9:54 PM on December 26, 2005

And here's yet another self-link, from someone who's also gotten away with it before.
posted by mediareport at 11:06 PM on December 26, 2005

These expressions of outrage are cathartic but ultimately useless. Any smart self linker would just leave their profile fields blank and we would all be none the wiser.

If the link were not IE only I would have liked it. It's the kind of thing I love. So in the future if you want you music recommendation engine on Metafilter's front page just email me and if it is good enough I'll post it.
posted by srboisvert at 1:59 PM on December 27, 2005