Derail discussion and Brand New Day genesis February 7, 2006 10:58 AM   Subscribe

The very model of a derail: I think a whole bunch of people need a timeout (as you wish). Badly. Soon.
posted by nkyad to Etiquette/Policy at 10:58 AM (363 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

The FPP was not really amazing, but is it really necessary to conduct such a childish pissing contest in the blue? I got tired to flag "derail" so I thought Meta was a better place to bring this up.
posted by nkyad at 11:00 AM on February 7, 2006


Maybe you should have linked to the comments in question, not the flagging pages, which are all essentially content-free.
posted by Plutor at 11:02 AM on February 7, 2006


(er, I think I meant "context-free")
posted by Plutor at 11:02 AM on February 7, 2006


Shit.
posted by nkyad at 11:03 AM on February 7, 2006


Flagged!
posted by R. Mutt at 11:04 AM on February 7, 2006


Comments in question:

#1201786
#1201745
#1201751
#1201754
#1201756
#1201766
#1201786
posted by jefgodesky at 11:08 AM on February 7, 2006


What can be done about it? I used to be angry that this sort of behavior wasn't punished but now I realize that it shouldn't be mathowie's burden to babysit a bunch of assholes. Maybe when every thread gets its own pre-emptive callout talk thread this sort of childish grudge-match behavior will stop. For now, there's nothing else to be done.
posted by nixerman at 11:10 AM on February 7, 2006


Once again:
The very model of a derail: I think a whole bunch of people need a timeout (as you wish). Badly. Soon.
posted by nkyad at 11:10 AM on February 7, 2006


90% of the people in that thread didn't even bother to read the thread and understand what is going on. Instead, they took a simplistic view of the situation and used it as a pretext to grind their axes further and confirm their biases.

The result is a bunch of exaggerated, outlandish rhetoric that has no basis in the actual story at hand. Par for the course, here on Metafilter. Why discuss reality when we can beat our partisan drums?

But I think timeouts are in order. People who argue personalities need to be given them, and Matt needs to make such things public, so people know that there are consequences for behavior.

The rhetoric is an race to the bottom, and that is sad. Between the "sucks more every day stuff" (which is tiring, and I thought he has been told already once to stop it) and the faux-characterizations of some percieved enemy, it really is a discredit to the entire site.

Make your points in good faith and let other people make their points. If you want to disagree, do so, but do so in a respectful manner. Shrillness is counter-productive; arguing personalities is always wrong.
posted by dios at 11:13 AM on February 7, 2006


Wakko. JP Hung. Witty. Wakko again. And again. Fandango_Matt. Witty again.
posted by fochsenhirt at 11:13 AM on February 7, 2006


Ok, cleaned up. I removed most every dumb off-topic pissing comment, and left the ones up that actually discussed the post itself.

There, that's not so hard.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:14 AM on February 7, 2006


Oh thank god, I was spitting nails when I thought that you intentionally linked to those flag pages, nkyad ("Who the hell does he think he is?!?")
All the comments were deleted though, so now I don't know who we're talking about.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 11:15 AM on February 7, 2006


What can be done about it?

Delete all political posts on Metafilter. Or create a separate place for them. Or institute a tags system where users can choose not see them.

Politics poisons the site.
posted by LarryC at 11:15 AM on February 7, 2006


nixerman : "What can be done about it?"

I usually favour the "flag and move on" line of thought, but for some reason this one felt particularly bad. Maybe because no side ever considered stepping aside and going Meta or maybe because the whole thing started several notches above the usual derail, like a says, a preemptive derail. So I thought it was worth a little more attention.
posted by nkyad at 11:15 AM on February 7, 2006


What the fuck was wrong with my comments?
posted by Witty at 11:17 AM on February 7, 2006


Thanks.
posted by OmieWise at 11:17 AM on February 7, 2006


What can be done about it? I used to be angry that this sort of behavior wasn't punished but now I realize that it shouldn't be mathowie's burden to babysit a bunch of assholes. Maybe when every thread gets its own pre-emptive callout talk thread this sort of childish grudge-match behavior will stop. For now, there's nothing else to be done.
posted by nixerman at 1:10 PM CST on February 7


Things can be done about it. There are all kinds of penal theories which have been debated to know end. To end the bad behavior, we need to give people timeouts who do it (incarceration/rehabilitation) and publically make it clear that such things will happen for those that continue to do it (deterrence).

Matt can delete the stuff and give timeouts publically. People will then understand that they better not do such things or else they face similar consequences. Behavior is then cleaned up because of deterrence, and the need for such consequences becomes less frequent.

Such a plan would work, in my estimation. But one thing is for certain: the current policy isn't. Deleting things if they get caught at the right times with no other consequence clearly isn't working.
posted by dios at 11:17 AM on February 7, 2006


I'm a homonym lover.
posted by dios at 11:19 AM on February 7, 2006


"Politics poisons the site."

I'll sign that.
posted by mojohand at 11:20 AM on February 7, 2006


Summary for those of us who missed the posts before they were deleted?
posted by booknerd at 11:20 AM on February 7, 2006


Delete all political posts on Metafilter....Politics poisons the site.

Sometimes, when you're bored and poking around in the archives, you can find some real gems.
posted by Gator at 11:21 AM on February 7, 2006


What the fuck was wrong with my comments?

They weren't really about the article, especially after wakko baited you, so they were off-topic.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:21 AM on February 7, 2006


Wasn't that the idea behind Devoter? Whatever happened to that?
posted by jefgodesky at 11:22 AM on February 7, 2006


A lot of you might mock this, but this type of issue is where (ahem) something awful shines. If you're not contributing in a thread, you get probation. Keep it up, and you get banned. No muss, no fuss.
posted by boo_radley at 11:22 AM on February 7, 2006


"Politics poisons the site."
Assholes poison the site. Take politics away, and they'd just find some other excuse to shit on the floor.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 11:23 AM on February 7, 2006


They weren't really about the article...

And these comments are... this one... and this one, and this one?

My comments were certainly on topic. I even contribute money to the guy and commented on it.

...especially after wakko baited you, so they were off-topic.

Baited me? I never responded to him other than to say, "that's enough"... after her 5 or 6 repetitive insults. Remove that comment, sure, since it wouldn't make sense without wakko's nonsense. But there was nothing wrong with my other comments.
posted by Witty at 11:27 AM on February 7, 2006


Summary for those of us who missed the posts before they were deleted?

omg amerikkka sucks! you post dead muslim jokes! do not! do too! stupid people is why I don't read the site anymore. No, you're stupid, stupidhead!

That's the gist of it.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:27 AM on February 7, 2006


Summary for those of us who missed the posts before they were deleted?

The posts just got worse and worse every day.
posted by brownpau at 11:28 AM on February 7, 2006


Fine witty, I removed two of those, left one joke up. Jokes != america is the suck derails. The thread is better for it, and actually about the topic at hand once again. Sorry I deleted all your comments, but most of them were flagged.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:30 AM on February 7, 2006


Ok, cleaned up. I removed most every dumb off-topic pissing comment, and left the ones up that actually discussed the post itself.

There, that's not so hard.
posted by mathowie at 1:14 PM CST on February 7


Nothing more? Just deleted? Did deletion work as a deterrent the last hundred times you cleaned up the thread? I understand your desire to avoid an iron fist. But at some point, you have to acknowledge that some sort of public awareness of consequence must exist. When the only risk is that you comment might be deleted, there isn't much of a deterrent to doing it next time (as evident by the fact that it is still happening). Making it publicly clear that things lead to timeout by actually publicly handing them out is something that will act as a deterrent, in my opinion.
posted by dios at 11:30 AM on February 7, 2006


Par for the course, here on Metafilter.

dios' profile
member since: November 18, 2004
dios has posted 11 links and 1650 comments to MetaFilter


"Boy, the food at this place is really terrible."

"Yeah, I know; and such small portions."

*laughs*
posted by matteo at 11:31 AM on February 7, 2006


Case in point. An attack on a personality that offers nothing to the discussion.
posted by dios at 11:32 AM on February 7, 2006


booknerd : "Summary for those of us who missed the posts before they were deleted?"

Basically a bunch of children calling each other names, taking every bait without even thinking.

I strongly disagree "politics" is to blame - there have been hundreds of political threads debating much more sensitive matters where the discussion and commenting was kept at a civil level (or at least the insults were on-topic). My money goes with Alvy's, subjects don't derail threads, assholes do.
posted by nkyad at 11:33 AM on February 7, 2006


i'm sorry, i missed the part where dios has any credibility at all to weigh in on the subject of other people's poor behavior.
posted by Hat Maui at 11:35 AM on February 7, 2006


dios writes "Making it publicly clear that things lead to timeout by actually publicly handing them out is something that will act as a deterrent, in my opinion."

dios matt does hand out time outs and even bans but not for calling names, we have a higher bar than that.
posted by Mitheral at 11:38 AM on February 7, 2006


dios : "Nothing more? Just deleted? Did deletion work as a deterrent the last hundred times you cleaned up the thread?"

Come on, dios, it is not like you're defending something new - Matt distributes timeouts often and from what I saw, they work pretty well. I don't even know if the cases I pointed were repeated offenders or just a new grudge. If they have just lost it in this particular thread, the deletions should be enough of a warning, shouldn't they?
posted by nkyad at 11:38 AM on February 7, 2006


since Matt gave him a timeout because of his anti-gay slur, Hat Maui
posted by matteo at 11:38 AM on February 7, 2006


Linking directly to the flagging URLs in an attempt to driect more flaggings at the comments you despise: not a great feature in a callout.
posted by scarabic at 11:39 AM on February 7, 2006


You know, this is now a thread with a bunch of links that don't go anywhere. You could have quoted the comments.
posted by puke & cry at 11:39 AM on February 7, 2006


ah, i see a summary upon non-preview.
posted by puke & cry at 11:40 AM on February 7, 2006


dios, the thread is better off. If it happens again and again, I'll do something more substantial with the users in question.

I agree with some of your points some of the time and I acknowledge that whenever possible, but I disagree that many timeouts and bannings and deletions are an easy way to "fix" the site. Lately you've mentioned that as the remedy in several instances and I think it's misguided and over the top which is why I won't be doing it today. I may in the future, but please refrain from telling me to ban people in the meantime, it's getting old.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:41 AM on February 7, 2006


Shrillness is counter-productive; arguing personalities is always wrong.
posted by dios at 2:13 PM EST on February 7 [!]


vs

Either way, I expect more out of Senators than rheortic that could come from Metafilter.
posted by dios at 10:49 AM EST on February 7 [!]


Next week on TalkLeft: a breaking analysis about how Bush has secretly created a process whereby he can "veto" acts of Congress and overrule the will of the people like the fascist he is.
posted by dios at 12:04 PM EST on January 25 [!]


Great post!

/masturbates furiously
posted by dios at 1:10 PM EST on January 13 [!]


Good point. I'd go with Sheehan only because she is such an opportunistic bitch

posted by dios at 11:47 AM EST on January 4 [!]


Shorter dios: shit stinks when it's not my own.

posted by orthogonality at 9:23 PM EST on January 25 [!]

posted by Rothko at 11:41 AM on February 7, 2006


Sorry Matt.
posted by fandango_matt at 11:42 AM on February 7, 2006


since Matt gave him a timeout because of his anti-gay slur, Hat Maui

ah. so like saul/paul, he possesses the zealotry of the convert.

except when he doesn't.
posted by Hat Maui at 11:43 AM on February 7, 2006



Puke & Cry: quoting the comments wouldn't really be a service to anyone. Matt's summation is accurate, with the exception that it doesn't catch the vituperative nature of the original material.
posted by boo_radley at 11:44 AM on February 7, 2006


Thanks, Rothko. That was totally on topic and helpful.
posted by loquacious at 11:45 AM on February 7, 2006


yeah boo_radley, refresh more, comment less.
posted by puke & cry at 11:45 AM on February 7, 2006


Also, can someone explain this comment? I'm not being snarky, I seriously don't get it, what it's referencing, why it was made, or to whom it's directed.
posted by fandango_matt at 11:46 AM on February 7, 2006


The comments in the thread, especially at the beginning, were particularly bad indeed. I almost posted a comment apologizing to mr_crash_davis, but figured that was just more noise.

So like a dozen were axed...is that come kind of record?

dios, why are you bringing up comments from a completely different thread from a poster who, AFAIK, didn't even comment in the thread in question?
posted by If I Had An Anus at 11:47 AM on February 7, 2006


Rothko's message is totally on topic. He's merely illustrating why Matt should give him a time-out.
posted by crunchland at 11:48 AM on February 7, 2006


puke & cry: here, here. Shoulda previewed after I got distracted for a few minutes.
posted by boo_radley at 11:48 AM on February 7, 2006


matteo wrote: dios' profile ... dios has posted 11 links and 1650 comments to MetaFilter ... *laughs*

Yeah, matteo, what a bunch of shitty posts. You sure got him.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 11:49 AM on February 7, 2006


*sigh*
posted by graventy at 11:52 AM on February 7, 2006


Sorry I deleted all your comments, but most of them were flagged.

Maybe deleting the entire thread would have made more sense since, you know, it doesn't really meet the fucking guidelines... one link to a news article? I don't doubt that my comments are flagged all the time, legitimately or not. But I would hope you don't delete comments based solely on the number of flags.

I don't mean to come off as a whiner, but jesus... one guy says, "Nice compassionate conservative you are" (or something like that), then calls me "shitty" for not jumping on the "America sucks" bandwagon. So I respond with, "when did I say I wasn't compassionate for the guy?"... and that gets flagged (and deleted)? That's all I asked. Then delmoi responds with a link to an unrelated thread about a jailed dope dealer. So then I send money to the soldier and comment about it... and that was flagged? I only posted about 4 times. How could those have been flagged... aside from the fact that they say "posted by Witty"?
posted by Witty at 11:52 AM on February 7, 2006


scarabic, it looks like that was a mistake.

Some others might be careful what they wish for.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 11:53 AM on February 7, 2006


Also, can someone explain this comment? I'm not being snarky, I seriously don't get it, what it's referencing, why it was made, or to whom it's directed.

Hypocrite.
posted by Rothko at 11:53 AM on February 7, 2006


Rothko, you posted "hypocrite" in a thread about surfing. You are either mistaken or insane, or both.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:55 AM on February 7, 2006


Witty, your comment was removed because it no longer made sense when the parent derailing comment was made. Please let it go, ok?
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:56 AM on February 7, 2006


Rothko's message is totally on topic. He's merely illustrating why Matt should give him a time-out.

I see. Simply quoting Dios is worthy of a time-out now, but calling someone a fuckwit isn't. Got it.
posted by Rothko at 11:56 AM on February 7, 2006


That should be... "then delmoi responds". Sorry.
posted by Witty at 11:57 AM on February 7, 2006


You are either mistaken or insane, or both.

I dread the day Matt finally tires of Rothko's ability to turn any thread into a Rothko vs. World pissing match, because Metafilter will instantly become ten times less entertaining.
posted by Ryvar at 12:02 PM on February 7, 2006


scarabic : "Linking directly to the flagging URLs in an attempt to direct more flagging at the comments you despise: not a great feature in a callout."

That was not the intention - I wrongly copied the URL from the flagging ([!]) link instead of copying from the correct one. My third comment repeats the post text with the correct URLs. Sorry for that.
posted by nkyad at 12:03 PM on February 7, 2006


monju_bosatsu, I think matteo's point was that dios was expressing a certain contempt or distaste for metafilter generally, which makes his own participation in it an interesting question.

Come to think of it, it's not an interesting question at all. I'm actually reminded a lot of Seth, who posted demands almost daily that Matt forbid all political discussion: the very threads he himself participated in almost exclusively. Good times, good times.
posted by George_Spiggott at 12:04 PM on February 7, 2006


Please let it go, ok?

Not a problem. I just think the admins tend to be a little heavy-handed in dealing with my comments and those of a few others based solely on the fact that we take opposing viewpoints much of the time (which often results in being insulted, targeted and flagged... you know, just 'cuz). I understand that I'm not well-liked around here, that's fine. I gave up long ago trying to be liked when it became obvious that I was part of a not-too-popular minority in terms of political leanings. But my opinions, ideas, and manners of debate are what they are... and I'm sorry if they create more headaches for you than is reasonable.
posted by Witty at 12:04 PM on February 7, 2006


posted by Witty one guy says "Nice compassionate conservative you are" (or something like that), then calls me "shitty" for not jumping on the "America sucks" bandwagon.

That was me. I said, "Ah, compassionate conservatism," which wasn't directed at you; it was a comment about the fucked-up-ness of the current administration.

I then said, "Also, Witty is shitty." This was directed at you, in reference to your remark about how the FPP sucked and how this was equivalent to how dead people occasionally get credit card offers or bills. Well, it isn't equivalent. A soldier nearly has his arm blown off, and the Army decides to bill him for the damaged flak jacket. I mean come on.
posted by fandango_matt at 12:05 PM on February 7, 2006


Given how hypocritical some of the participants in this thread are, the irony is hilarious. Where's Pot and Kettle when you really need them?
posted by Rothko at 12:05 PM on February 7, 2006


We should go to the Something Awful method of bans (easy to get banned and easy to pay your way back in), because then Matt could make some money off of it.
posted by smackfu at 12:07 PM on February 7, 2006


Witty : "I just think the admins tend to be a little heavy-handed in dealing with my comments and those of a few others based solely on the fact that we take opposing viewpoints much of the time"

Actually, your two comments I quoted specifically were clearly off-topic answers to off-topic comments (both were quoted too, one by wacko, another by fandango_matt). I don't like or dislike you, as a matter of fact I don't even flag many comments and this was the first time I flagged one of your comments. You see, there is a whole different space dedicated to the kind of discussion you were having (or found yourself sucked into) and answering in kind to clear off-topic insults just serves to pollute the blue (regardless the FPP quality or its lack thereof).
posted by nkyad at 12:13 PM on February 7, 2006


metafilter is awesome. the threads about threads get more traffic than the threads themselves. truly meta.
posted by kcm at 12:16 PM on February 7, 2006


I just think the admins tend to be a little heavy-handed in dealing with my comments and those of a few others based solely on the fact that we take opposing viewpoints much of the time

I get my shit deleted all the time. Maybe you and those 'few others' just bitch about it more so those deletions take on a higher profile. Personally when an admin takes the time to remove something I've posted, I try to learn something from it to improve my future contributions.
posted by If I Had An Anus at 12:18 PM on February 7, 2006


We should go to the Something Awful method of bans (easy to get banned and easy to pay your way back in), because then Matt could make some money off of it.

Treating people like shit encourages them to act like shit.
posted by Ryvar at 12:19 PM on February 7, 2006


Well, I dislike Witty, but I think he's wrong that his comments are deleted because of partisanship. I've seen just the opposite, actually--conservatives get far, far more leeway from Matt, I suspect in an effort to avoid such an accusation.
posted by MrMoonPie at 12:20 PM on February 7, 2006


conservatives get far, far more leeway from Matt, I suspect in an effort to avoid such an accusation.
ding, ding, ding!

It's pretty cowardly to blame the utterly predictable results of bad behavior on Matt.
posted by sonofsamiam at 12:24 PM on February 7, 2006


It's pretty cowardly to blame the utterly predictable results of bad behavior on Matt.

Help me out son, are you saying that's what MrMoonPie was doing?
posted by Kirth Gerson at 12:28 PM on February 7, 2006


You sure got him

monju, always confused, missed the "such small portions" joke, but it's not a problem. and anyway, dios' posts are not shitty -- well, not all of them, just 2 on 11 are really shit -- they're average.

it's just silly that he spends so much time -- and effort -- in a site that he apparently hates so much. must be a S/M thing.
posted by matteo at 12:31 PM on February 7, 2006


I believe son is saying I'm right about Witty's comment-deletion history.
posted by MrMoonPie at 12:32 PM on February 7, 2006


Yes, MrMoonPie is right. Matt puts up with far more crap from conservatives than he does from liberals.

Speaking as a conservative.
posted by sonofsamiam at 12:38 PM on February 7, 2006


Oh, OK. And I also agree.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 12:41 PM on February 7, 2006


Given how hypocritical some of the participants in this thread are, the irony is hilarious. Where's Pot and Kettle when you really need them?

More importantly, where's a big ol' loading dose of Haldol of when you really need it...

Anyway, this website has become like a classroom full of second graders, hiding behind the teachers skirt because someone called them a fuckwit. It's just so fucking childish, and yet still manages to amuses me to no end.
posted by SweetJesus at 12:41 PM on February 7, 2006


sonofsamiam : "Matt puts up with far more crap from conservatives than he does from liberals."

Anything in the name of memetic diversity - an all-liberal ecosystem would be too boring.
posted by nkyad at 12:42 PM on February 7, 2006


Nowadays, I prefer to hide inside teachers skirts.
posted by nkyad at 12:44 PM on February 7, 2006


(please make matteo's and rothko's comments in this thread go away, or something, because they are examples of the worst kind of derailing we see on mefi)

I agree with LarryC to some extent. It's the degree to which MeFi is perceived to be a partisan political website that poisons it.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 12:44 PM on February 7, 2006


"Where's Pot and Kettle when you really need them?"

Some days, we're just superfluous.
posted by Pot at 12:48 PM on February 7, 2006


What Pot said.
posted by Kettle at 12:49 PM on February 7, 2006


That poopie-pants, Kettle, called me names!
posted by Pot at 12:50 PM on February 7, 2006


Politics poisons the site.

Stupidity poisons the site.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 12:52 PM on February 7, 2006


Politics poisons the site. - LarryC
Assholes poison the site. Take politics away, and they'd just find some other excuse to shit on the floor. - Alvy Ampersand

I'd have to agree with Alvy. We talk about Canadian politics on this site periodically, and it seems that none of the assholes get all up in arms about what we're doing up here in "Soviet Canuckistan" (to quote a favourite *cough* American of mine) and we have civil discussions even though we don't all agree on the issues.

I do notice that certain personalities like to drag their political conflicts into every darn thread even when they have nothing to do with the topic or any of the ensuing discussion. This drives me nuts. If I want to argue about politics I'll go to those threads. Not every post has to be about Bush's latest appointment. Especially when it's not about American politics in the first place.
/rant on pet peeve.
posted by raedyn at 12:53 PM on February 7, 2006


*random link to past arguments*
posted by Kettle at 12:53 PM on February 7, 2006


Ethereal Bligh : "(please make matteo's and rothko's comments in this thread go away, or something, because they are examples of the worst kind of derailing we see on mefi)"

This is MetaTalk - I think they're allowed to pursue their particular "guerra a Dios" here to some extend. And please notice he has even refrained from joining in for another epic battle of wills.
posted by nkyad at 12:53 PM on February 7, 2006


That was not the intention - I wrongly copied the URL from the flagging ([!]) link instead of copying from the correct one.

Fair enough.
posted by scarabic at 12:59 PM on February 7, 2006


What raedyn said--there are a lot of jerks here, but the cry of "90% of that thread is political nonsense" is nonsense itself. Some people got out of line and their comments were deleted--I learned stuff about military equipment and the chain of command I didn't know before. If you don't like the thread, push the inviting green "back" arrow and guess what? You never have to deal with it again!

That said, I think even Gene Shalit would have a hard time finding anything funny about Pot and Kettle. There's a dual bannination we should get behind.
posted by bardic at 1:00 PM on February 7, 2006


it's just silly that he spends so much time -- and effort -- in a site that he apparently hates so much.

Does he apparently hate it so much? I've gotten the impression that he has a lot of opinions about the site and how it is administered, but then, hey, so do I. So do a lot of people here. Complaining about policy and community mores and so forth is pretty much par for the course. If anybody here loves everything exactly how it is in every instance, lucky them.

So that seems like kind of a lousy thing to say.
posted by cortex at 1:01 PM on February 7, 2006


Rothko, seriously, you're not persecuted here. People don't like you continually bringing personal grudges into threads. People also don't like your continual history digging for shit to sling. More than either of those, though, people fucking HATE your incessant need to get the last word in. There are certainly instances where people bring you up unnecessarily into unrelated threads, but that doesn't make you doing it ok.

If you understand this, then you can stop doing these things, and stop constantly reacting to every bait thrown your way. Eventually, people would stop accusing you of doing these things. But you have to stop doing them, first.
posted by shmegegge at 1:03 PM on February 7, 2006


(please make matteo's and rothko's comments in this thread go away, or something, because they are examples of the worst kind of derailing we see on mefi)

Please give Ethereal Bligh the time-out he deserves, because time-outs are given to everyone else for doing what he does on a repeated basis, and if he is given special treatment, then an explanation why would be useful.
posted by Rothko at 1:03 PM on February 7, 2006


9:42 AM 2/6, Optimus Chyme makes a MeTa callout against saying "so-and-so wins the thread."

3:43 PM, 2/6, Optimus Chyme then does exactly that.

12:53 PM, 2/7, user named "Kettle" links to it.

1:07PM, 2/7, [coffee sprays monitor]
posted by scarabic at 1:07 PM on February 7, 2006


re: Rothko's comment and anything to do with Rothko: blech. Let's ignore, shall we?

I think dios likes this site, and many of the people here, a great deal. Perhaps the perception that he does not, and (more likely) that this perception is willful, factors into these problems. People are painting very ugly caricatures of those they deem their ideological enemies, dios of course among the offenders. This sort of thing is poisonous. It's always the case that that exagerated, fictional demon one has created is in the wrong—you are always in the right when you position against it. How can there be productive discourse then?
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:10 PM on February 7, 2006


time-outs are given to everyone else for doing what he does on a repeated basis, and if he is given special treatment, then an explanation why would be useful

They arent; he doesn't; it wouldn't.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:11 PM on February 7, 2006


If you understand this, then you can stop doing these things, and stop constantly reacting to every bait thrown your way. Eventually, people would stop accusing you of doing these things. But you have to stop doing them, first.

I tried, but people like Ethereal Bligh keep picking a fight with no provocation whatsoever. It's tiresome.

If I try to defend myself in Metatalk, it turns into a pile-on run by a bunch of miserable hypocrites. If I defend myself in Metafilter, I'm accused of derailing. The admin sits there mute while it's done, either way.

Sorry, but there really is persecution going on here, and I'm not sitting by idly anymore while you folks do it.
posted by Rothko at 1:12 PM on February 7, 2006


People are painting very ugly caricatures of those they deem their ideological enemies, dios of course among the offenders. This sort of thing is poisonous. It's always the case that that exagerated, fictional demon one has created is in the wrong—you are always in the right when you position against it. How can there be productive discourse then?

You are a hypocrite.
posted by Rothko at 1:13 PM on February 7, 2006


Wow!
posted by timeistight at 1:18 PM on February 7, 2006


Image hosting by TinyPic
posted by loquacious at 1:19 PM on February 7, 2006 [1 favorite]


MetaFilter: Ignore Anything Having To Do With Rothko.
posted by fandango_matt at 1:20 PM on February 7, 2006


Is there a way to set individual user preferences to not display comments by certain users? By now I'm convinced that there are certain people who will never contribute anything useful to a conversation/thread and it would help if I didn't even have to see their noise. How bout that for a pony? Or, as I've said before, put the username before the comments...helps in the same way.
posted by spicynuts at 1:20 PM on February 7, 2006


Unfair, Rothko, unfair - he apologized later in the same thread. In bold even.
posted by nkyad at 1:21 PM on February 7, 2006


Jesus Christ, Rothko, it's just a website. Get a dog, go outside, let it go.
posted by spicynuts at 1:21 PM on February 7, 2006


There's a Firefox/GreaseMonkey script which does exactly that. It's very useful. Hang on, I'll try to find the link...
posted by fandango_matt at 1:22 PM on February 7, 2006


(that was for spicynuts)
posted by fandango_matt at 1:23 PM on February 7, 2006


Rothko, I don't have any particular problem with you, except this one: every thread you participate in seems to become all about you, and how somebody slighted you, and how you have to defend yourself. A whole bunch of people have tried to give you advice about how to avoid the mess, but if you read it at all, your response is always "yeahbut." Please give it a rest.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:23 PM on February 7, 2006


Who won the thread?
posted by Optimus Chyme at 1:25 PM on February 7, 2006


EB, le dieu has a nasty habit of framing his positions with throwaway lines like "Of course KOS-reading mefites. . ." or "The lefty echo-chamber here. . . ." That's pretty damn annoying, don't you think?

I like this place because it's pretty darn cool, warts and all. Hell, I really like some of the warts. No doubt le dieu likes this place as well, but my sense is that it's in a wierd, paternalistic, do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do way. And you can't deny that he derails threads. Sometimes because he wants to, sometimes because people have pigeonholed him--but life is unfair. He could just get another handle like many lesser members before him have done.
posted by bardic at 1:26 PM on February 7, 2006


I think everyone needs a timeout. Matt, can you just suspend all user accounts for a while?

There are tens of thousands of registered users here, and yet it feels like it's always the same six assholes that hijack every thread. Whatever the policy is on comments right now, it's not working.
posted by Gamblor at 1:27 PM on February 7, 2006


If I try to defend myself in Metatalk, it turns into a pile-on run by a bunch of miserable hypocrites. If I defend myself in Metafilter, I'm accused of derailing. The admin sits there mute while it's done, either way.

Sorry, but there really is persecution going on here, and I'm not sitting by idly anymore while you folks do it.


Dude. This thread isn't even about you. Or at least it wasn't until you came in here and made it about you.

You, yourself. Made this thread. About you. You started it. You're bathing in it. You'll continue to wallow in it, your own self-made bed of shit.

Here's a pro tip: JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP FOR ONCE AND PEOPLE WILL STOP "ATTACKING" YOU AND PICKING APART YOUR HALF-ASSED, MALFORMED "ARGUMENTS".

Easy. No defense needed. You don't even have to say anything. No one is forcing you to enter any thread anywhere and turn it into the All Rothko Therapy Hour.

Just. Shut. Up. That's not persecution, that's just plain and simple fucking logic.
posted by loquacious at 1:27 PM on February 7, 2006


Everyone here is a hypocrite and should be given a time-out. Also, why is this still open?
posted by puke & cry at 1:28 PM on February 7, 2006


If I try to defend myself in Metatalk, it turns into a pile-on run by a bunch of miserable hypocrites. If I defend myself in Metafilter, I'm accused of derailing. The admin sits there mute while it's done, either way.

Sorry, but there really is persecution going on here, and I'm not sitting by idly anymore while you folks do it.




It's like Rothko is living in New Jerusalem, and we're all Romans...
posted by SweetJesus at 1:30 PM on February 7, 2006


Okay, let me put this in the way that you tend to. Maybe if it's as effective a way to communicate as you believe it is, it'll work.

I tried, but people like Rothko keep picking a fight with no provocation whatsoever. It's tiresome.

My replacement of your name with EB's has not made the statement false. Bear that in mind.

It's only persecution if you're not guilty of what you're being accused of.
posted by shmegegge at 1:32 PM on February 7, 2006


fucking logic is the best kind of logic.
posted by puke & cry at 1:33 PM on February 7, 2006


My lone comment to EB:

The fact of the matter is that Islam is in a more violent, radical and xenophobic phase. Christianity is not. Christianity has been in the past, and the Crusades are just one example. But a very large portion, probably half, of the world's Christian population lives in Western secular societies that all have long-standing cultures of tolerance.

"Well you know what I knew, that my God was bigger than his," said Lt Gen Boykin. "I knew that my God was a real God, and his was an idol."
posted by Rothko at 11:10 PM EST on February 5 [!]

----
His response:

Rothko, if by your comment you meant to compare me to Boykin, you're proving yourself to be the miserably little ignorant loudmouthed fuckwit that you are.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 2:54 AM EST on February 6 [!]
----

That kind of comment — even excluding EB's attempt to bait me earlier this week on Metatalk, when I wasn't even talking to him — gets anyone else here banned for a week. It's not the first time he's done that either. /shrug
posted by Rothko at 1:33 PM on February 7, 2006


Get a dog, go outside, let it go. - spicynuts

There's a Firefox/GreaseMonkey script which does exactly that. It's very useful. Hang on, I'll try to find the link... - fandango_matt

I think every MeFite could probably benefit from the "go outside" script.
posted by raedyn at 1:33 PM on February 7, 2006


Image hosting by Photobucket
posted by ND¢ at 1:34 PM on February 7, 2006


You know what I think is one of the reasons dios gets the shit he does? He typically responds to the flame-baiters a LOT more than he does the civil discoursers. (It's a word. suck it, dictionaries.) Of course threads are going to derail when you keep getting in a fight about being called names, and ignoring the topical responses. Now, he doesn't always ignore the topical responses, but the ratio is weighted way too heavily on the side of nasty shit slinging.

I don't think he does it on purpose, but damn if he isn't willfully remaining ignorant of the effect this has on threads.
posted by shmegegge at 1:36 PM on February 7, 2006


posted by raedyn I think every MeFite could probably benefit from the "go outside" script.

What we really need is a script that administers electric shocks.
posted by fandango_matt at 1:37 PM on February 7, 2006


He typically responds to the flame-baiters a LOT more than he does the civil discoursers.

That's because the civil discoursers rely on facts, which are way harder to complain about than mean names.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 1:37 PM on February 7, 2006


What we really need is a script that administers electric shocks. - fandango_matt

Reminds me of my grade nine math teacher: He actually told the class he wished he had a big row of buttons so he could administer shocks to students when they got out of line. "And I'd have a big red one right here in the middle for Danny" he told us. He wasn't a super teacher, but he sure was entertaining.
posted by raedyn at 1:40 PM on February 7, 2006


Unfair, Rothko, unfair - he apologized later in the same thread. In bold even.

Only when he was put on the spot by other people.
posted by Rothko at 1:40 PM on February 7, 2006


"EB, le dieu has a nasty habit of framing his positions with throwaway lines like 'Of course KOS-reading mefites. . .' or 'The lefty echo-chamber here. . . .' That's pretty damn annoying, don't you think?"

Yes, and I certainly didn't claim he was innocent of this. But we leftists on this do exactly the same thing to Dios and other rightists. It's disruptive.

Ed Kilgore (New Donkey) wrote something on this very topic just a few days ago. Here's what he had to say:
More recently, I entered the moral hazard zone by getting into a colloquoy over at TPMCafe wherein I criticized a trend among some progressives focused on the NSA surveillance story to speak fondly of people like Grover Norquist and Paul Weyrich. In responding to Matt Yglesias' suggestion that Norquist's position against the NSA program indicated that Grover wasn't all bad, I said: "Matt, Grover Norquist is all bad; if you look up 'bad' in the dictionary, you see his photo."

Now I'm perfectly willing to stand by the argument that Norquist's politics are all bad, and indeed, that his opposition to NSA surveillance is based on well-articulated Norquistian positions that are bad as well. But I probably implied that I knew Norquist was an evil person, and that's a judgment that should be consigned to his actual friends and associates, and to the Almighty. I've met the guy exactly once, when I debated him on CSPAN after writing a very hostile profile of him in Blueprint magazine, which now seems more accurate than ever. Up close, I did observe that he looked remarkably average physically, given his self-identification as a macho guy who likes gunplay, uses violent language in attacking his enemies, and once spent a lot of time hanging out with guerillas in Angola and Mozambique. But I didn't smell the brimstone, see the horns, or hear anything that made me certain I knew the dark depths of his soul.

[...]

My allegiances are clear; my conviction of the moral superiority of progressivism and the Democratic Party is unequivocal. But if we are, to use the overworn but useful phrase, the "reality-based community," it's important that we stick to what we actually know, and let the other side become the party of know-it-alls who really are know-nothings.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:40 PM on February 7, 2006


That's because the civil discoursers rely on facts, which are way harder to complain about than mean names.

That's certainly an interpretation, but he does a really good job of acting just like someone who is really just way too wrapped up in an actual point of view. If he's trolling he's absolutely incredible at remaining in character, because he really is exactly like everyone I know who just gets too wrapped up in arguments to see the other side very clearly.
posted by shmegegge at 1:41 PM on February 7, 2006


I feel like I've read some variant on this thread every day for the past two years.
posted by trey at 1:47 PM on February 7, 2006


Matt or Jessamyn-Can you please close this thread?
posted by OmieWise at 1:47 PM on February 7, 2006


I'd like to see a "Brand New Day" policy, where all grievances are nullified by moderator fiat. We start fresh, and referring to behaviour that occurred before the Brand New Day is no longer fair game to refer to in any form, with the banhammer used frequently and brutally on offenders.

I'm an asshole. I know it. I made a decision, though, to greatly reduce petty sniping (I still succumb on occasion, I admit), completely stop attempting to "defend" myself from personal attacks, and the like. It's not easy, it's uncomfortable, and I have doubts about whether or not it actually improved the level of debate in an unmoderated forum (or mostly unmoderated, like this one).

But it's doable. For me, at least. I and those people with whom I had regularly butted heads have not been butting heads. Given, I'm not as prolific as most of the other assholes here who have long, long history amongst themselves.

For those people, a Brand New Day policy might be the ticket. Personality A could no longer quote Personality B's 'greatest hits' from months past as an illustration of why they've kept their grudge going. Personality C would have to justify their snark without falling back on "well, Personality D has done this and this and this to me."
posted by solid-one-love at 1:49 PM on February 7, 2006 [1 favorite]


Not a bad idea, SOL. I find that AskMe has been helping me lately in trying to (again) reform my internet-assholity (yes, indeed, suck it, dictionaries).
posted by klangklangston at 1:52 PM on February 7, 2006


solid-one-love writes "I'd like to see a 'Brand New Day' policy"

Good idea. The people who couldn't abide by the policy would have more than earned their bannings. It would be a way to make behavior more moderate regardless of feelings.
posted by OmieWise at 1:54 PM on February 7, 2006


good idea SOL.
posted by Dreamghost at 1:56 PM on February 7, 2006


Of course, we could just encourage everybody to just pretend such a policy existed, and act accordingly.
posted by cortex at 1:57 PM on February 7, 2006


I made a decision, though, to greatly reduce petty sniping

*checks recent comments*
So you have, solid-one-love. Good on you.
posted by If I Had An Anus at 1:59 PM on February 7, 2006


This merits repeating:

What can be done about it?

Delete all political posts on Metafilter. Or create a separate place for them. Or institute a tags system where users can choose not see them.

Politics poisons the site.


Metafilter was once a memepool with cool and intelligent discussion. Now it's nothing more than AgendaFilter 50% of the time. I'm not the only one who's sick of this agenda.
posted by furtive at 2:00 PM on February 7, 2006


So the Brand New Day punishes everyone who fails to ignore the history of the users who've built their reputations on pissing off everyone else. Yeah, great policy.

This policy would hold a great deal more sway if the people for whom it is needed would simply stop acting like assholes of their own voilition.
posted by fandango_matt at 2:02 PM on February 7, 2006


I think that's an excellent idea, SOL. Like the "Great Reset" in Kingdom of Loathing, after which everyone will start from scratch.
posted by Gamblor at 2:03 PM on February 7, 2006


What can be done about it?

The idea of more timeouts is fine, but it also means a lot more administrative workload. I think some other methods are required... Several users have mentioned the Something Awful method, it would be great if someone could post a quick summary. Also, here are a couple of ideas that might help.

Deleted comment count: The number of deleted comments should be recorded right beside the users comment count on their profile page. It fleshes out each user's track record while avoiding the popularity contest problem.

Temporary comment limit: I think a temporary comment limit, say 10 comments per week, would help some users learn to be more economical with their opinion. There is a lot of noise that doesn't really deserve penalty, but is obviously not well thought out and detracts from the site. In particular, I think it could eliminate a lot of the back and fourth sniping without unfairly silencing a user.

In fact, to help reduce administrative effort, the two methods could be combined. Comment deletion could trigger an automatic one week comment limit for any user.
posted by Chuckles at 2:03 PM on February 7, 2006


What solid-one-love said. Best damn idea I've heard here in a long time.
posted by y6y6y6 at 2:05 PM on February 7, 2006


Matt or Jessamyn-Can you please close this thread?
posted by OmieWise at 3:47 PM CST on February 7


Why? Really? I get tired of threads being closed. This topic hasn't been fully flushed out (and will just reappear in some other form if closed).

Plus, if we closed it, we would have missed out on this good proposal:

I'd like to see a "Brand New Day" policy, where all grievances are nullified by moderator fiat. We start fresh, and referring to behaviour that occurred before the Brand New Day is no longer fair game to refer to in any form, with the banhammer used frequently and brutally on offenders.
posted by solid-one-love at 3:49 PM CST on February 7


I think that is an interesting policy and would greatly help the community. The personality conflicts and grudges ruin the dialogue, and one recurring incident of this is when people bring up old stuff (as has been done in this thread, with predictable results).

You know what I think is one of the reasons dios gets the shit he does? He typically responds to the flame-baiters a LOT more than he does the civil discoursers.

Ther is a mount of deserved criticism in this comment that I completely own up to. Would that I was capable of completely ignoring all of the flame-bait. I wish that I would and consider it a deficiency that I don't. But I think you are wrong in your judgment about degree. I make a concerted effort to respond to the "civil discoursers" more than the flamebait. I ignore scores of flame-bait comments, and try to engage most anyone who is asking me a respectful question who treats me respectfully (if the number was cut down, I could easily ignore them all; it's a volume problem). I ignore anyone who doesn't treat me respectfully, but sometimes I slip and fire back. Certainly those instances are more easily noticed then my attempts to engage in a good faith dialogue. And while I admittedly deserve some of the blame when I don't fully ignore the snipes, I would be interested in your view of all the people who are issuing that flame-bait and insult me.

And those that seem interested: I really like this site. I love it in the rare instances when people engage me in a good faith discussion. I just would like to have the rest of the stuff cleared out so I don't have to weed through the muck to find those discussions.
posted by dios at 2:05 PM on February 7, 2006


"Comment deletion could trigger an automatic one week comment limit for any user."

That's a very interesting idea, and I think it would work. Except for one problem.

That one problem is that for good reason matt and jess use a light hand in deletions and do so ad hoc using their best judgment. They also, even taken together, do not read the entire site everyday so there are comments they never see.

Before you institute a punitive policy related to comment deletion, the whole approach to deletion would have to be more formal and more comprehensive. Otherwise it would erupt into complaints about unfairness. But formalizing and being comprehensive about comment review is perhaps not a realistic goal for mefi.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 2:09 PM on February 7, 2006


So the Brand New Day punishes everyone who fails to ignore the history of the users who've built their reputations on pissing off everyone else.

I think we're talking about the fact that people seem to come into every (political) thread with a chip on their shoulder and a grudge against some user X that they feel disrespected them.

I understand you feeling that people have been assholes (because they have been, oh my yes they have been), but from the standpoint of preventing people from being assholes in the future, it would benefit everyone if we could just say "bygones" and hold people to a higher standard from now on.
posted by Gamblor at 2:10 PM on February 7, 2006


Deleted comment count: The number of deleted comments should be recorded right beside the users comment count on their profile page. It fleshes out each user's track record while avoiding the popularity contest problem.

Temporary comment limit: I think a temporary comment limit, say 10 comments per week, would help some users learn to be more economical with their opinion. There is a lot of noise that doesn't really deserve penalty, but is obviously not well thought out and detracts from the site. In particular, I think it could eliminate a lot of the back and fourth sniping without unfairly silencing a user.

In fact, to help reduce administrative effort, the two methods could be combined. Comment deletion could trigger an automatic one week comment limit for any user.
posted by Chuckles at 4:03 PM CST on February 7


I think this is a toned down version of what I proposing up thread, but its based on the same idea: having a consequence to comments. I don't particular like the idea of a public deleted comment count because some people might take that as a badge of honor, so I would think a private one would be good. And the comment limit wouldn't address the kind of person (typically a sock puppet) who posts less than 10 comments a week anyhow and they are all noise. But I think the concept of consequences is a step in a better direction.
posted by dios at 2:11 PM on February 7, 2006


OMGWTFBBQALEXREYNOLDSPLSGOJERKOFFAWAYFROMYOURKEYBOARDKTHXBI
posted by youarenothere at 2:13 PM on February 7, 2006


But I think the concept of consequences is a step in a better direction.

Agreed. Deleting offensive comments justs sweeps the arguments under the rug, and doesn't stop them from spilling over into other threads. And every time someone gets reprimanded, they cry, "Yeah, but dios/Rothko/Witty did it first..."
posted by Gamblor at 2:17 PM on February 7, 2006


I wouldn't have the patience to deal with MetaFilter's loudest, shrillest, and/or dumbest members if I were in Matt's shoes.

It's certainly not the site I originally joined.
posted by gohlkus at 2:20 PM on February 7, 2006


OmieWise writes "Matt or Jessamyn-Can you please close this thread"

Why? People busy here aren't busy elsewhere.
posted by Mitheral at 2:22 PM on February 7, 2006


I'd like to see a "Brand New Day" policy, where all grievances are nullified....

I tried that, once. It didn't go quite as I'd hoped...
posted by LarryC at 2:24 PM on February 7, 2006


I'm getting nostalgic for the time when metatalk threads devolved into inline image fests and stupid in-joking. Now they turn into a soap opera between a couple of little, undermedicated schizoid grudge-meisters, and Matt ends up closing them to comments.
posted by crunchland at 2:26 PM on February 7, 2006


People busy here aren't busy elsewhere.

I think that's kind of the idea behind Matt's dream of a "talk page" for every thread (discussed here, here, and here).

I wonder if that's still in the works.
posted by Gator at 2:28 PM on February 7, 2006


EB, point taken. I'm not sure the analogy holds completely, but I appreciate the words you quoted.

Beyond this, would people take me and my ideas about making a kinder, gentler mefi if I got banninated a few times first? Off to stormfront.org for a while, kthxbye!
posted by bardic at 2:30 PM on February 7, 2006


It's certainly not the site I originally joined. - gohlkus, member since: May 22, 2001

Of course not. Name any community and/or any living breathing website that hasn't changed in 5 years.
posted by raedyn at 2:30 PM on February 7, 2006




MeFi has actually changed LESS than most other sites, in my estimation.
posted by raedyn at 2:31 PM on February 7, 2006


*more seriously* sez bardic
posted by bardic at 2:32 PM on February 7, 2006


Well, here is the problem with closing them:

It assumes that everyone who might have something productive to offer has had a chance to look at the thread and offer what they have. Threads that are on Day 10 of nothing but personality arguments and in-line images might be worth closing up (if there is value in closing at all).

But threads closing in their first couple hours is premature in my opinion. In this instance, had the thread been closed up thread, we would have missed out on solid-one-love and Gamblor's proposals only because they didn't see it soon enough. I think we are better off in keeping them open so that people can offer their views. Someone who lives over on the other side of the globe might have the perfect solution to the issue, and I'd hate to think he lost it for the sake of closing a thread.
posted by dios at 2:32 PM on February 7, 2006


Otherwise it would erupt into complaints about unfairness.

Complaints about unfairness could trigger an automatic two week comment limit for any user.
posted by timeistight at 2:33 PM on February 7, 2006


posted by Gamblor I think we're talking about the fact that people seem to come into every (political) thread with a chip on their shoulder and a grudge against some user X that they feel disrespected them.

I understand you feeling that people have been assholes (because they have been, oh my yes they have been), but from the standpoint of preventing people from being assholes in the future, it would benefit everyone if we could just say "bygones" and hold people to a higher standard from now on.


Yes, I agree--an enforced "let bygones be bygones" policy would benefit everyone immensely, but it puts the onus of change on the people who aren't cheifly responsible for creating the mess in the first place. It's sort of like addressing the problem of graffitti by painting all the walls, and then threatening to cite the businesses who fail to keep the walls clean.

A better solution would be for the offenders to simply change their behavior, as SoL apparently has. As far as his claim to have begun a Brand New Day, whether SoL now considers us people is another matter and the clarification of such would go a long way toward welcoming that change. Talk is cheap.
posted by fandango_matt at 2:33 PM on February 7, 2006


raedyn writes "MeFi has actually changed LESS than most other sites, in my estimation"

Agree, I was expecting a meltdown of /.ian proportions when Matt opened the $5 flood gate. That fear doesn't seem to be materializing.
posted by Mitheral at 2:36 PM on February 7, 2006


Fandango, why are you bringing that up? Can't we just let SoL change, without trying to bait him back to his old ways? If someone changes and you keep piling on, that removes the incentive for change. We've all been assholes at some time or other (at least I have) and we all deserve the opportunity to improve.
posted by LarryC at 2:38 PM on February 7, 2006


Goddammit, f_m, it's a Brand New Day.
posted by cortex at 2:40 PM on February 7, 2006


"Who won the thread?" - Optimus Chyme

Bardic won the thread.
posted by Pot at 2:40 PM on February 7, 2006


Yeah, f_m, that was uncool. That's exactly the kind of thing we're talking about trying to eradicate, or at least lessen.
posted by Gator at 2:41 PM on February 7, 2006


ND¢ won the Internet.
posted by Kettle at 2:42 PM on February 7, 2006


It's sort of like addressing the problem of graffiti by painting all the walls, and then threatening to cite the businesses who fail to keep the walls clean.

If we're serious about strengthening the rules for disciplining errant members, then it's really more like painting all the walls to get rid of the existing graffiti, and then threatening to throw anyone caught tagging in jail.

This does require non-asshole users to give the miscreants the benefit of the doubt, but it also gives the offenders a chance to change their ways without someone throwing their past comments in their face. And if they continue to be dicks, then they can get booted/banned/sent to the angry dome, or whatever. But they won't be able to cry about "Why now when you let others do the same?" anymore.
posted by Gamblor at 2:46 PM on February 7, 2006


Well, s-o-l has proposed a policy which puts the onus of change and forgiveness on the people who have been tolerating assholish behavior, when the onus ought to be on the people who've been acting like assholes, where it rightfully belongs.

If they want to change, great. Please do that. But do not demand that the rest of us immediately pardon them for their churlishness. Maybe we could do it like it works in real life: change your behavior, and keep it that way. People will notice, and will respond accordingly.
posted by fandango_matt at 2:46 PM on February 7, 2006


This thread was brought to you by Monistat, for those days you feel less than fresh.
posted by mischief at 2:46 PM on February 7, 2006


I agree that the Brand New Day idea puts more of an onus on the people who are perceiving others' previous bad behaviour rather than on the people who have been perceived as having had bad behaviour. On the other hand, that perceived bad behaviour would be considered to have never occurred, so it's kind of a moot point. And, really, it is all about perception. Someone you may think has behaved badly I might think has behaved nobly, and vice-versa. This way, there's no perceived bias; all are treated equally.

Consider it a kind of forced amnesty and presidential pardon, wrapped up in one. The crime never occurred, and you can't refuse to hire someone because of the crimes that have been erased.

It looks like a free pass, but I think it would be useful in that it would mitigate the most egregious personality wars. If there was, say, a one-strike-you're-out policy, we'd lose some of the worst offenders very, very quickly, I predict.

I have been defended by people in this thread with whom I have had past personality wars; this is evidence, I think, that detente works. I feel that forced detente may also work.
posted by solid-one-love at 2:52 PM on February 7, 2006


Jesus, I leave for a couple hours and Rothko continues his antics? How many MetaTalk threads this week have devolved into flame-outs starring Rothko and the many imagined grudges against him?

He's been pure noise for a while now, turning every thread into a war between everyone and himself. He complains about comments made by others in separate threads. I can't remember the last contribution of any merit was made by him. I've had enough of it.

He can no longer post here.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:52 PM on February 7, 2006 [2 favorites]


Unfair, Rothko, unfair - he apologized later in the same thread. In bold even.

Only when he was put on the spot by other people.
posted by Rothko at 4:40 PM EST on February 7 [!]


Rothko is George Costanza!
posted by quonsar at 2:53 PM on February 7, 2006


So, do you now consider us people? This is not a snark, nor is it baiting. I'm honestly curious.
posted by fandango_matt at 2:55 PM on February 7, 2006


WOW! The day has finally arrived.
posted by trey at 2:57 PM on February 7, 2006


he cannot answer.
posted by quonsar at 2:57 PM on February 7, 2006


fandango_matt: I interpreted solid_one_love's idea as something that would act on the poster as a whole. He says he's been an asshole, sure, but asshole no more. I think this interpretation entirely puts the onus on the assholes: You want your sins washed clean, the Brand New Day will do that. As it washes away your sins, so does it wash away your grudges. If people call you out on your behavior, the most you can say would be ,"Yeah, but things have changed now."

I think that it exactly describes "(changing) your behavior, and keep it that way."

On preview: Holy crap!!!
posted by boo_radley at 2:57 PM on February 7, 2006


Fandango, what I think about you and other users, and what you and other users think about me are not germane to this or any other thread. If you want to talk with me about personality issues, you can contact me via e-mail, which ten seconds of Google-Fu should help you find.
posted by solid-one-love at 2:59 PM on February 7, 2006


LOL @ ALEX

That is all
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 3:00 PM on February 7, 2006


He says he's been an asshole, sure, but asshole no more

No, I'm still an asshole. I'm just trying harder.
posted by solid-one-love at 3:01 PM on February 7, 2006


well, sure. You're containing it, I guess. Asshole, but polite about it, maybe?
posted by boo_radley at 3:03 PM on February 7, 2006


Yes, now it really is a Brand New Day!

boo_radley: Actually, s-o-l didn't say he's been an asshole but no longer will be one--he said he is an asshole but he will reduce the petty sniping. I read this as "I'm still going to act like an asshole, but I won't engage in the fights I'll start." I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt but I'd sure like to hear some clarification.
posted by fandango_matt at 3:04 PM on February 7, 2006


I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt but I'd sure like to hear some clarification.

Then why don't you follow his very sensible suggestion?
posted by timeistight at 3:06 PM on February 7, 2006


I think reducing the petty sniping goes a long way towards not being an asshole, though.
posted by boo_radley at 3:07 PM on February 7, 2006


Isn't it possible that he knows he's an asshole, and he's trying not to be an asshole as much, but it's hard to stop being an asshole, but he's trying?

I mean, that sounds like the most plausible explanation, to me.
posted by cortex at 3:09 PM on February 7, 2006


Actually Rothko is pretty good in AskMe, if you, uh, ask me. If he's permanently banned, I would hope that everyone not gloat about it. It's pretty poor form to attack someone unable to defend himself.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 3:10 PM on February 7, 2006


If you want to talk with me about personality issues, you can contact me via e-mail,
posted by solid-one-love at 4:59 PM CST on February 7


I want to second this piece of advice in general. If anyone wants to discuss personality issues, talking personally through e-mail is an extremely effective way to do so. Of course, this would require that the person A actually want to talk about and resolve some dispute with person B instead of just bashing person B on a message board. But if person A really wants to resolve something or give advice, they will find person B is more receptive and the discussions more effective if A just e-mails instead of addressing it on the site. I have had a standing policy asking people to e-mail me in my profile because I have found that people are personable and less apt to demonize the other when they discuss things through e-mails.
posted by dios at 3:10 PM on February 7, 2006


i'd quite like to be kramer - thus ends one of the great metatalk threads - thanks guys , it's been very enjoyable - all that was missing was son of minya - shame these threads get closed off - i think it just makes people take their fights elsewhere , but there you are.
posted by sgt.serenity at 3:10 PM on February 7, 2006


fandango_matt: the onus ought to be on the people who've been acting like assholes, where it rightfully belongs.

Let's put the onus on If I Had An Anus and see if he notices.
posted by fleacircus at 3:16 PM on February 7, 2006


dios, you give very creepy e-mail. Please don't assume that someone who doesn't respond to them doesn't want dialogue--they're simply content to let you hoist yourself on your own rhetorical petards, frequently, if not constantly.

As an aside, I'm a contact to a number of perma-banned mefites. This makes me the equivalent of red kryptonite, SSIH!
posted by bardic at 3:17 PM on February 7, 2006


Couldn't we just ban Alex from MeFi and MeTa? He's nice on AskMe.
posted by klangklangston at 3:19 PM on February 7, 2006


Well, let that be a lesson to us all.

I think we all know what engenders a pleasing and open atmosphere for discussion, and what does not.

You can't change people, even after living with them for years... and here we often find ourselves, struggling to do so through such an anemic medium.

I can only support honest self-moderation of ones own posting frequency and content. In light of that, I commend solid-one-love for being open about his initiative to modify his behavior. Let's take such measures at face value and work with them, not against.
posted by prostyle at 3:20 PM on February 7, 2006


Dammit. Optimus, we are more alike than you know!
posted by klangklangston at 3:20 PM on February 7, 2006


FREE REYNOLDS
posted by moift at 3:21 PM on February 7, 2006


.
posted by sciurus at 3:22 PM on February 7, 2006


WITH EVERY ORDER!
posted by klangklangston at 3:22 PM on February 7, 2006


"work with them, not against"

Where is puke & cry?
posted by mischief at 3:26 PM on February 7, 2006


prostyle, do you work for a management consulting or public relations firm?

and bye bye Rothko, you will be missed, like that nagging pain in the knee that predicts an incoming storm
posted by gsb at 3:28 PM on February 7, 2006


How about a 1 post each limit on any MeFi thread?
posted by blue_beetle at 3:28 PM on February 7, 2006


like that nagging pain in the knee that predicts an incoming storm

I've got one of those. Motherfuck do I hate it.
posted by sciurus at 3:44 PM on February 7, 2006


blue_beetle writes "How about a 1 post each limit on any MeFi thread"

How the heck are you supposed to have a discussion if everyone only gets one comment?
posted by Mitheral at 4:09 PM on February 7, 2006


sent to the angry dome

Sounds dangerous.

Yet, I would like to buy tickets to this angry dome. Either as a spectator or participant.
posted by loquacious at 4:11 PM on February 7, 2006


FREE REYNOLDS

I am free !
well , i think i am.
Aye bye alex , at the last scottish meetup we all agreed we liked you , if thats any help.
The threads are very entertaining but rather hard to follow.
I like what sol said as well - good on you , i think i might have done one of these apology things myself once and they are very good , nobody's perfect.
posted by sgt.serenity at 4:11 PM on February 7, 2006


You're right. Good on you, s-o-l.
posted by fandango_matt at 4:19 PM on February 7, 2006


.The result is a bunch of exaggerated, outlandish rhetoric that has no basis in the actual story at hand. Par for the course, here on Metafilter.
...
Shrillness is counter-productive; arguing personalities is always wrong.


Fightin' Dios makes yet another appearance where he opens his post by insulting every single user on metafilter and then pretending he's a mature and noble person.

Fightin' Dios shitting on everybody else. Par for the course.
posted by I Love Tacos at 4:26 PM on February 7, 2006


"Brand new day" policy?

How is throwing out reputation a good idea?

I think what everyone really wants is a "bury old hatchets" policy, not a cold restart from zero.
posted by scarabic at 4:33 PM on February 7, 2006


They can take my hatchet when they pry it from my cold, dead back.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:36 PM on February 7, 2006


Dios: I'd just like to add, since I know you'll scan this for your name, that it's truly sad that you choose to participate in this site in such an unneccessarily dickish and confrontational manner.

You can, and do, add a lot of substance to the conversation when you want to. It's unfortunate that the vast majority of your posts are one or more of the following:
1) demeaning to many
2) willful attempts to start fights
3) faux victimization, where you pretend you aren't routinely guilty of 1 and 2

I find it absolutely fucking astounding that you've emailed me privately, asking why it is that I think you're sad.

Wasted potential is always sad.
posted by I Love Tacos at 4:39 PM on February 7, 2006


I'll come out as being against this one. Rothko can be a royal pain in the ass, yes, but he's no worse than many others I could name, and he can be engaged if you know how to handle him.
posted by jonmc at 4:41 PM on February 7, 2006


mathowie: You missed one.

Hey everybody, the comments here typify why I think mefi is on the decline. I see so many fewer posts by people I respect, and many more posts by idiots.
posted by e40 at 9:57 AM PST on February 7 [!]

posted by I Love Tacos at 4:49 PM on February 7, 2006


Can we get a quantification on that "vast majority", please?
posted by cortex at 4:50 PM on February 7, 2006


Rothko: Image hosting by Photobucket
posted by keswick at 4:51 PM on February 7, 2006


more like roflko
posted by wakko at 4:55 PM on February 7, 2006


threads like this are a lot less fun when I'm sober.
posted by jonmc at 4:56 PM on February 7, 2006


And I'll come out in favor of him being banned, at least for the time being. I myself can not think of anyone else remotely as disruptive on such a continual basis. How is he to be handled? By simply agreeing with everything he says, and never ever having the temerity to disagree with him? Because every time I see anyone bother to dispute him, no matter how politely, he immediately retaliates as if attacked, begins berating his "oppressor" in full "nyah nyah can't hear you, you doodyhead" mode, and is completely impervious to reason.

It isn't as if he hasn't been told over and over again, by people who bore him no ill will, that his behavior was extreme and obnoxious. He chose to ignore them.

Screw him.
posted by John Smallberries at 4:57 PM on February 7, 2006


If you recall, back when the shit intially hit the fan, I was one of the lead torchbearers against this guy, but I've managed to disagree civilly with him since. Maybe it's my rugged good looks and boyish charm, I don't know. But if I can manage, anyone can.
posted by jonmc at 5:02 PM on February 7, 2006


Gloating over Rothko's exile? Bad form! Why don't you guys just go 'neener neener neener'? Sheesh.
posted by mischief at 5:07 PM on February 7, 2006


Cheer up, jonmc. AlexReynolds/Rothko gets to try out solid_one_love's "Brand New Day" idea when he signs up under a new, unblemished username.

I wish him luck; maybe third time's the charm.
posted by timeistight at 5:07 PM on February 7, 2006




obscure?
posted by wakko at 5:14 PM on February 7, 2006


Rothko can be a royal pain in the ass, yes, but he's no worse than many others I could name

If you recall, back when the shit intially hit the fan, I was one of the lead torchbearers against this guy, but I've managed to disagree civilly with him since. Maybe it's my rugged good looks and boyish charm, I don't know. But if I can manage, anyone can.


This isn't about agreeing or disagreeing with rothko. You're barking up the wrong tree. From his comments matt banned rothko for turning every thread into a thread about him. And he's right, especially in metatalk.

And in that way yes, he is worse than others.

He's an intelligent guy. I just don't understand why he hasn't learned to let things go.
posted by justgary at 5:15 PM on February 7, 2006


What John Smallberries said. And Rothko just isn't smart enough to be that angry.
posted by Ryvar at 5:23 PM on February 7, 2006


Maybe now Mark Rothko can stop spinning in his grave over the hijacking of his name.
posted by scody at 5:29 PM on February 7, 2006 [1 favorite]


dios writes "The rhetoric is an race to the bottom, and that is sad. Between the 'sucks more every day stuff' (which is tiring, and I thought he has been told already once to stop it) and the faux-characterizations of some perceived enemy, it really is a discredit to the entire site."


dios, I linked to a quote of what somebody (a US President, no less) actually said. That's not "faux characterization".

And you're disingenuously conflating (Swift Boating?) me with another user; I haven't said "anything about sucks more every day".

If you've got a hard-on to call me out, dios, do it honestly. Don't try to smear me with what another user did, don't pretend that the folks on your "side" didn't say what they really did say.
posted by orthogonality at 5:46 PM on February 7, 2006


"...and he can be engaged if you know how to handle him."

Everyone knows my thoughts about Rothko, so I want to make it clear that my response to this statement is not specifically about Rothko, or any other particular member.

"If you know how to handle him" are the magic words that tell me that a person should not be "handled", but rather no longer be allowed to use his emotional outbursts and antics as the means to force everyone around him to enable him. We've all known people like this, and probably most of us have a friend or relative that does this.

Some of us grew up as children held hostage to the moods of someone like this.

There is a difference between being fair and reasonable and forgiving, and being manipulated by someone else's neurosis. I'll be the former, but not the latter.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 5:58 PM on February 7, 2006


If I Had An Anus writes "I get my shit deleted all the time."
*blink*
posted by peacay at 6:01 PM on February 7, 2006


I think of my shit as being deleted, but I could really attach a tiny camera and see where it goes.
posted by selfnoise at 6:05 PM on February 7, 2006


It's clear from the above and a thousand other threads that the self-post rules should apply to comments too. If you're about to make a comment justifying, defending, lauding or simply referencing yourself - don't.
posted by freebird at 6:06 PM on February 7, 2006


"Don't try to smear me with what another user did, don't pretend that the folks on your 'side' didn't say what they really did say."

Sense anything wrong with your statement, orthogonality? Why is it that we expect other people to deal with us as reasonable, independent individuals but treat others as if they were stand-ins for our enemies? Probably every one of us does this, and its wrong.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 6:07 PM on February 7, 2006


EB, frankly, if anybody deserves to a timeout it's you. Please drop the act. You're not fooling anybody. It's not just an unfortunate coincidence that you happened to be right there at the scene of the crime with your hand in the cookie jar every time Rothko felt the need to flame out. I really hope you and all the others who felt the need to get down in the mud and wrestle with Rothko will learn from this opportunity instead of gloating. The next time you feel somebody is emotionally torturing you just ignore them. You don't have to be "fair and resonable," you don't have to do anything--just ignore them.

In the end we can only hope this is the end--at least for a little while--of GrudgeFilter.
posted by nixerman at 6:09 PM on February 7, 2006


posted by nixerman In the end we can only hope this is the end--at least for a little while--of GrudgeFilter.

VendettaFilter.
posted by fandango_matt at 6:10 PM on February 7, 2006


He's been pure noise for a while now, turning every thread into a war between everyone and himself.

Thank you, Matt. It had gotten beyond bizarre during the last week; I'm glad to see a serious consequence, and hope he gets some help for whatever is ailing him. It almost certainly has nothing to do with Metafilter.
posted by mediareport at 6:13 PM on February 7, 2006


Now the hot sport on Metafilter will be to spot the Rothko sock puppets.
posted by crunchland at 6:21 PM on February 7, 2006


"You're not fooling anybody. It's not just an unfortunate coincidence that you happened to be right there at the scene of the crime with your hand in the cookie jar every time Rothko felt the need to flame out."

Uh-huh. Just like I did in this thread? Care to review my comments? I've been walking away from Rothko's antics for months now.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 6:22 PM on February 7, 2006


posted by Ethereal Bligh I've been walking away from Rothko's antics for months now

It's sort of like plumbing. You always want the shit moving away from you.
posted by fandango_matt at 6:25 PM on February 7, 2006


Rothko, a word of advice. When you come back under a new username, just don't let ANYBODY know who you are. Forget the old names ever existed. Start on a fresh note, and treat every page of metafilter like it was AskMefi. And if somebody insults you, ignore it. That last bit could be advice for everybody.
posted by Roger Dodger at 6:26 PM on February 7, 2006


Why don't you guys just go 'neener neener neener'?

NEENER NEENER NEENER!
posted by quonsar at 6:33 PM on February 7, 2006


This doesn't solve anything.
posted by furtive at 6:34 PM on February 7, 2006


What's the over under on MeFites who have conditioned themselves to become sexually aroused by MeTa threads like these? Who lube up for every callout in hopes of acheiving the ultimate metasm: coming with the banhammer.

100? More?
posted by kosem at 6:37 PM on February 7, 2006


I've had enough of it. He can no longer post here.

Thank fuck. Headscratchingly long overdue.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:38 PM on February 7, 2006


nixerman: I really hope you and all the others who felt the need to get down in the mud and wrestle with Rothko will learn from this opportunity instead of gloating. The next time you feel somebody is emotionally torturing you just ignore them. You don't have to be "fair and resonable," you don't have to do anything--just ignore them.

I used to wrestle with Alex back before he was Rothko. He annoyed the hell out of me. So I decided, as much as possible, to ignore him. He still annoyed me, I just wasn't involved with him much. Other people, however, instead of ignoring, continued to butt heads with him. As a result, he flamed out, and got banned. I am much happier.

I haven't learned any lessons from this. I think it was just something that happened, not an object lesson. However, if someone twisted my arm and said "Learn a lesson!", that lesson would be the opposite of what you're saying. "Don't just ignore annoying and emotionally unstable users, they won't go away. Instead, gently prod and poke them into flaming out and being banned."

I'm pretty sure that's not the lesson you want learned, so I'm going to continue to not draw a lesson from this, and consider it just a quirk of history.
posted by Bugbread at 6:44 PM on February 7, 2006


I heart bugbread.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 6:57 PM on February 7, 2006


poke poke.
posted by exlotuseater at 7:01 PM on February 7, 2006


Hey, who put this onan on me?
posted by If I Had An Anus at 7:03 PM on February 7, 2006


This doesn't solve anything.

It's a good example.
posted by mediareport at 7:07 PM on February 7, 2006


So... Rothko's banned, yet this thread is no less poisonous for his removal. Hmmm.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 7:37 PM on February 7, 2006


This should be put on the sidebar.
posted by Falconetti at 7:46 PM on February 7, 2006


Apparently, he's still fighting to get the last word!

Rothko's mefi homepage Before:
MetaDash is a Dashboard widget for Mac OS X 10.4.2. It behaves as a RSS feed viewer for Metafilter, Ask Metafilter, and Monkeyfilter (and can be extended to some other site feeds). Additionally, news items can be added automatically to the del.icio.us online bookmarking service with one click (free account req'd). (15 Jan 2006)
And After:
Note: MetaDash is no longer available for download. Please respect the developer's wishes and do not illegally redistribute copies. Please contact the developer for more information. (7 Feb 2006)
posted by ryanrs at 7:53 PM on February 7, 2006


So... Rothko's banned, yet this thread is no less poisonous for his removal. Hmmm.

Perhaps not this thread, but the site is. Only a little, teeny, tiny bit, but nonetheless just a little less poisonous.
posted by Bugbread at 8:11 PM on February 7, 2006


I guess he showed us.
posted by crunchland at 8:12 PM on February 7, 2006


Damn. I meant to dl that. anyone got a copy?
posted by exlotuseater at 8:13 PM on February 7, 2006


Metatalk: This doesn't solve anything.

(but it makes for an enjoyable break from reality)
posted by birdsquared at 8:14 PM on February 7, 2006


Wakko, Keswick, c'mon. Don't gloat. Jesus.
posted by klangklangston at 8:21 PM on February 7, 2006


Quite right, klang; this is not the time for animated GIFs. Instead, allow me to give a more appropriate tribute to the Rothko we knew: the precise timestamp of his final "fuck you". May it be forever documented in the historical record he loved so much.
535 ~$ telnet reynolds.bio.upenn.edu 80
Trying 130.91.128.171...
Connected to support-reynolds.bio.upenn.edu.
Escape character is '^]'.
GET /metadash/ HTTP/1.1
Host: reynolds.bio.upenn.edu

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 03:56:14 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.33 (Darwin) PHP/5.1.2
Last-Modified: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 00:12:20 GMT
ETag: "10e48f8-7c5-43e93764"
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: 1989
Content-Type: text/html
posted by ryanrs at 8:41 PM on February 7, 2006


This shit is still going even after the dude got banned? People actually have the time in their lives to come in here and make a little 'bye whore' graphic? Jesus, how do you people run your real lives? Instant kharma's gonna get you, as a man once said. Go hug your mother, or wife or child or dog or something, people.
posted by spicynuts at 8:46 PM on February 7, 2006


This thread needs a group hug.
posted by TwelveTwo at 8:57 PM on February 7, 2006


Instant kharma's gonna get you, as a man once said.

but that man spelled it correctly.
posted by quonsar at 9:15 PM on February 7, 2006


That's unfortunate, Rothko laughed at a funny I made once, and was an always interesting and helpful voice on AskMe.

Still, it's Matt's house.

What are the odds any of the gloaters will remember that once they go too far?
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:23 PM on February 7, 2006


I also think the gloating is bad form. I think mathowie did the right thing, but there's a part of me that would much rather see a better AlexReynolds return one day and be a positive contributor to the site.

dios: I would be interested in your view of all the people who are issuing that flame-bait and insult me.

As far as my personal opinon, for what that's worth: I detest the predictable ones. Alex was easily one of those, chief among them frankly. The ones who just do it on occasion I see as people who are legitimately upset and voicing a concern. However unfortunate the way they choose to do so may be, I think it's just that: unfortunate. It's a human reaction.

Frankly, I see your responses to this anger the same way. Like I said above, and have said before. I don't think you're trolling or anything, just unfortunately prone to being insulted by insults. You and everyone else in the world, I guess. It sucks that that shit upsets you as much as it does, and leads to derails sometimes, but it's a human reaction.
posted by shmegegge at 9:28 PM on February 7, 2006


Hmm, I wondered why some of my comments, and all of witty's had been removed. Although linking directly to the flagging page is lame, and, quite frankly totaly pointless.
posted by delmoi at 9:30 PM on February 7, 2006


People actually have the time in their lives to come in here and make a little 'bye whore' graphic?

No, but people do have time to grab a copy of the gif from the SA Forums and post it here. So it wasn't really all that much time, when you come down to it.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:31 PM on February 7, 2006


delmoi: it was an honest mistake on nkyad's part. see here.
posted by matthewr at 9:46 PM on February 7, 2006


Delmoi, that was an accident.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:47 PM on February 7, 2006


I think dios likes this site, and many of the people here, a great deal. Perhaps the perception that he does not, and (more likely) that this perception is willful, factors into these problems. People are painting very ugly caricatures of those they deem their ideological enemies, dios of course among the offenders. This sort of thing is poisonous. It's always the case that that exagerated, fictional demon one has created is in the wrong—you are always in the right when you position against it. How can there be productive discourse then?

No offense, but that's just such a brain-dead analysis. Dios hardly even says anything political anymore, certainly not about his own opinion, if he posts in political threads it's always 'devils advocate' Socratic method BS anyway, at least in the threads I've seen. His political comments wouldn't even be noticed otherwise.

No it's this "me me me, everything is about ME" stuff that gets irritating, this martyrdom complex, this imagined perpetual victimhood that gets so tiresome. Plus, he seems to want to control the site so much, make it fit to exactly what he wants "intelligent discourse" (except when he's pissed off, apparently, as Rothko showed above). Then he always complains that so and so should be banned or timed out or what he thinks is "hurting the site" when of course what he means is making the site less enjoyable for him. Dios only cares about himself, and what he wants, and doesn't consider what's best for the site as a whole.

Off the top of my head I can think of three conservatives, Loquax(sp?), Asparagirl, and ParisParamus who don't irritate me at all. Paris is a special case, in that how annoying he is largely dependant on how strongly people react to him, and people do a good job of not reacting to strongly.

Really, it has nothing to do with Ideology, and everything to do with the personality itself.

Then we have these Dios fans who listen to Dios whine and insist we do everything we can to make him comfortable, because Dios' comfort is really just the most important thing.
posted by delmoi at 10:05 PM on February 7, 2006


delmoi: it was an honest mistake on nkyad's part. see here.

Yeah, I realized that. Probably should have read some of the comments before posting. (also, people are still reading this thread?)
posted by delmoi at 10:06 PM on February 7, 2006


i think my pixels need washing
posted by pyramid termite at 10:16 PM on February 7, 2006


I'd like to see a "Brand New Day" policy, where all grievances are nullified by moderator fiat. We start fresh

O'Brien, is that you?
posted by delmoi at 10:19 PM on February 7, 2006


I'd like to see a "Brand New Day" policy, where all grievances are nullified by moderator fiat. We start fresh, and referring to behaviour that occurred before the Brand New Day is no longer fair game to refer to in any form, with the banhammer used frequently and brutally on offenders.

Scratch that, sounds more like Mao.

Here's a policy: We just delete all the obnoxious comments, and self-absorbed authority fetishists can suck it.
posted by delmoi at 10:25 PM on February 7, 2006


It's threads like this and shit like that makes me so very, very happy that I'm not Matt. He's already got one baby to sit for, it'd be nice if MeFi could get out of the damned diapers sometime.

(And no, that's not a knock on AlexKo).
posted by fenriq at 10:31 PM on February 7, 2006


delmoi writes "No it's [dios's] 'me me me, everything is about ME' stuff that gets irritating, this martyrdom complex, this imagined perpetual victimhood that gets so tiresome."

Spot on.
posted by orthogonality at 10:39 PM on February 7, 2006


Delmoi: Maybe you like PP and Aspara more because they haven't been seen in a while?
posted by klangklangston at 10:41 PM on February 7, 2006


He's been pure noise for a while now, turning every thread into a war between everyone and himself. He complains about comments made by others in separate threads. I can't remember the last contribution of any merit was made by him. I've had enough of it.

He can no longer post here.


Wow. (and yeah, I'm participating in this thread late. *shrugs*).

And I'll come out in favor of him being banned, at least for the time being. I myself can not think of anyone else remotely as disruptive on such a continual basis. How is he to be handled? By simply agreeing with everything he says, and never ever having the temerity to disagree with him?

Me too. I feel bad, but ultimately it's not about him, it's about the site, IMO. Although I do kind of worry that something is, like, actually wrong with him.

Now I'm going to sleep.
posted by delmoi at 10:44 PM on February 7, 2006


Delmoi: Maybe you like PP and Aspara more because they haven't been seen in a while?

Aspara said she stopped posting in political threads, and she mostly posts in ask (from what I've seen). PP has been active in the past month or so, I'm pretty sure. There must be a lot of conservatives here who don't post much about politics, but if someone's not a 'personality' it's hard to remember them, unfortunately.
posted by delmoi at 10:46 PM on February 7, 2006


It's threads like this and shit like that makes me so very, very happy that I'm not Matt. He's already got one baby to sit for, it'd be nice if MeFi could get out of the damned diapers sometime.

No kidding, I would hate to have to do that kind of thing.
posted by delmoi at 10:47 PM on February 7, 2006


Hopefully not.
posted by moonbiter at 10:51 PM on February 7, 2006


Maybe it's time to bring up the fact that this thread has entirely been about me, and how everybody hates me.

Must I provide links? You jerks know what I'm talking about. I'm outta here.
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:35 PM on February 7, 2006


I'm back!
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:36 PM on February 7, 2006


i miss the old Astro Zombie. this new guy is a putz.
posted by Hat Maui at 12:06 AM on February 8, 2006


Wow, I got halfway down the thread then skimmed the rest to look at the amusing pictures (of which there were none, slackers) and missed all the action

Jesus, I leave town for the night and the circus rolls in.
posted by NinjaPirate at 1:28 AM on February 8, 2006


Of course, this would require that the person A actually want to talk about and resolve some dispute with person B

Of course, you're assuming that people actually give a shit about what you think. personally, I have enough of you here without feeling the need to read more fascist shit via e-mail as well.


Thank fuck. Headscratchingly long overdue

well, since Rothko, for all his noise, also posted actual content here (check out his FPPs and his askme answers), unlike, for example, you, dear stavrostheselfappointedmoderator, it's not that big a reason to rejoice (except, of course, for Steve at Dimwood and his USDA-prime bovine brethren)
posted by matteo at 2:17 AM on February 8, 2006


I suppose one could mount an argument that there is a kind of ledger in which one's good behaviour (on AskMe) compensates for one's bad behaviour (on MeFi and MeTa).

Put another way, a user could 'buy' the ability to act like an ass in one context with exemplary behaviour in another, and as long as that user didn't stray too far into the red for too long, could avoid bannination.

I doubt the idea would fly with the majority, however. I don't even care for it much myself.
posted by Ritchie at 2:45 AM on February 8, 2006


So, we have one guy who gets tossed out for making every thread about him. Then, six hours later, we have another guy who shows up and makes eight posts in an hour, including three in a row, while demonstrating that he didn't read the thread. There must be a word for that phenomenon.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 2:55 AM on February 8, 2006


>> Instant kharma's gonna get you, as a man once said.
>
> but that man spelled it correctly.

Actually I think that's a keeper. Snuggles right up to "Bheer is the one true Ghod" and the other cosmic h-accessorized locutions.


> Wow, I got halfway down the thread then skimmed the rest to look at the
> amusing pictures (of which there were none, slackers)



It's a new day--go, be peaceful. If the jackboots 'n' brown shirts contingent, represented by me, can manage it, how can all you peaceniks do less?

posted by jfuller at 3:04 AM on February 8, 2006


Why can't we all just, get along?

/Jack Nicholson drawl
posted by longbaugh at 4:37 AM on February 8, 2006


I can't believe I just read all of that.
I know this is sudden, but I love you Metafilter.
posted by slimepuppy at 4:54 AM on February 8, 2006


It's a brand new day... for kittens.

posted by darukaru at 6:03 AM on February 8, 2006


Y'know, Matt, as long as you're banning... This guy could use a "Hey, don't try to make a post about diet and the scientific method into a crusade about 'evolutionism' timeout" at least.
posted by klangklangston at 6:08 AM on February 8, 2006


Whoa, that was unexpected!
posted by OmieWise at 6:22 AM on February 8, 2006


Wow... what a thread this turned out to be. Thanks Rothko, for making this about you. Anyway... I need to comment on one thing.

I then said, "Also, Witty is shitty." This was directed at you, in reference to your remark about how the FPP sucked and how this was equivalent to how dead people occasionally get credit card offers or bills.

Well, the thread was shitty. The FPP was shitty, for being one link to a news article. And the thread was shitty (at the point of my first comment) because the first several comments were the usual "America sucks", "why do you hate America", etc. I also never said anything was equivalent. What I said was, sometimes dead people still get credit card applications in the mail... which is to say, both situations arise out of what could be nothing more than a clerical error. But of course, I get jumped on for not having any compassion for the guy and being "shitty" because I didn't follow suit with taking jabs at America. Ultimately, my comments were deleted because of it.
posted by Witty at 6:28 AM on February 8, 2006


klangklangston writes "This guy could use a 'Hey, don't try to make a post about diet and the scientific method into a crusade about "evolutionism" timeout' at least."

He's an easily ignored one trick pony.
posted by Mitheral at 6:41 AM on February 8, 2006


So's Rothko.
posted by klangklangston at 6:53 AM on February 8, 2006


So's was Rothko.
posted by ND¢ at 7:02 AM on February 8, 2006


There's still time to make this thread about Witty.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 7:12 AM on February 8, 2006


There's still time to nuke the entire site from orbit.
posted by selfnoise at 7:17 AM on February 8, 2006


Y'know, Matt, as long as you're banning... This guy could use a "Hey, don't try to make a post about diet and the scientific method into a crusade about 'evolutionism' timeout" at least.
posted by klangklangston at 6:08 AM PST on February 8


It's pretty clear bevets will never be banned or timeoutted regardless of how much derailing or self-linking he does. See here and here. Forget it, klangy. It's Metatown.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 7:23 AM on February 8, 2006


Because mathowie "cleaned up" that thread, and because I simply don't have time to find out what those comments were, I have no idea what you people are talking about.

I will say that deleting comments in the Blue for "shitting in the thread" sounds like a bad idea to me. We've already seen massive outcry in favor of deleting dios' and Paris' comments -- and even banning them -- because somehow everything they say strikes some people as "wrong".
posted by davy at 7:33 AM on February 8, 2006


Thanks for checking in, davy. Too bad you can't spend more time with us. Buhbye.
posted by crunchland at 7:34 AM on February 8, 2006


But of course, I get jumped on for not having any compassion for the guy and being "shitty" because I didn't follow suit with taking jabs at America.

No, I jumped on you because you insulted me in your first post to the thread.

The rest is history.
posted by wakko at 7:36 AM on February 8, 2006


I love you, MetaTalk. You help the afternoons fly by.
posted by antifuse at 7:39 AM on February 8, 2006


Where're Yakko and Dot?

Optimus: Ah well, I can dream, can't I?
posted by klangklangston at 7:41 AM on February 8, 2006


No, I jumped on you because you insulted me in your first post to the thread.

I did? I said the post, the article, was nothing more than an excuse for "wakko and his dingdong posse" to show up and say "America sucks"... which is EXACTLY what you and your dingdong posse did (and do every time someone makes a post of that nature). Sorry if that "insults" you.
posted by Witty at 7:43 AM on February 8, 2006


Ding dong wedding.
posted by If I Had An Anus at 7:50 AM on February 8, 2006


Oh shit, I need a Hostess cake something fierce now. Thanks a fucking lot.
posted by selfnoise at 8:01 AM on February 8, 2006


How about a 1 post each limit on any MeFi thread - blue_beetle

How the heck are you supposed to have a discussion if everyone only gets one comment? - Mitheral

"It's not about the discussion, it's about the links!"
"Discussion!"
"Links!"
"Discussion!"
"Links!"
/rehash

Obviously, the only reasonable solution would be to purchase multiple sock puppet accounts.

But seriously, that's a terrible idea.
posted by raedyn at 8:03 AM on February 8, 2006


klangklangston : "This guy could use a 'Hey, don't try to make a post about diet and the scientific method into a crusade about "evolutionism" timeout' at least."

Bevets is a robot-script designed to represent the devil's advocate in all Evolution threads, so that the discussion don't get too one-sided. And please notice he is always a very polite robot - he almost never acknowlege insults and always argues from the logical consequences of his ilogical position. I say a ban is quite uncalled for. If memory serves me, Matt also said something along this lines the last time such a request transpired.
posted by nkyad at 8:14 AM on February 8, 2006


And the thread was shitty (at the point of my first comment) because the first several comments were the usual "America sucks", "why do you hate America", etc.
posted by Witty at 6:28 AM PST on February 8

No, I jumped on you because you insulted me in your first post to the thread. The rest is history.
posted by wakko at 7:36 AM PST on February 8

I did? I said the post, the article, was nothing more than an excuse for "wakko and his dingdong posse" to show up and say "America sucks"... which is EXACTLY what you and your dingdong posse did (and do every time someone makes a post of that nature). Sorry if that "insults" you.
posted by Witty at 7:43 AM PST on February



I think that all Metafilter Arch-enemies© should have to have usernames that start with the same letter, ala the epic (totally non-completely boring and pointless) witty/wakko grudge-fest. If the user that you are meta-feuding© with doesn't have a username that starts with the same letter as yours, then I am just not going to pay you any attention (and that's what this is all about isn't it?). In fact, I think that I would get more attention if I had a Metafilter Arch-enemy©. Are you up for it NinjaPirate? How about you nofundy? I'll make you famous!
posted by ND¢ at 8:21 AM on February 8, 2006


klangklangston : "This guy could use a 'Hey, don't try to make a post about diet and the scientific method into a crusade about "evolutionism" timeout' at least."

Bevets is a robot-script designed to represent the devil's advocate in all Evolution threads, so that the discussion don't get too one-sided. And please notice he is always a very polite robot - he almost never acknowledge insults and always argues from the logical consequences of his illogical position. I say a ban is quite uncalled for. If memory serves me, Matt also said something along this lines the last time such a request transpired.
posted by nkyad at 8:35 AM on February 8, 2006


jfuller: you forgot the pancakes.


posted by deborah at 8:46 AM on February 8, 2006


ND¢ : "In fact, I think that I would get more attention if I had a Metafilter Arch-enemy©. Are you up for it NinjaPirate? How about you nofundy? I'll make you famous!"

I don't want to be your arch-enemy, ok?

But this is a nice pony request: MetaGrudge - a step before a timeout or a ban. Anyone who get too obnoxious is exiled (automatically redirected) to MetaGrudge for a week, which is an exact copy of the blue (but only the exiled users participate). I think Heinlein has a book where hardcore criminals were not send to jail but exiled internally (in the place where Utah used be, I think). They could do whatever they wanted there. The inside was not pretty to see, but the outside was far more peaceful.
posted by nkyad at 8:52 AM on February 8, 2006


Sorry if that "insults" you.

I'm sure you sincerely are.
posted by wakko at 8:53 AM on February 8, 2006


Well, genius, no, I'm not... because I don't see what's insulting about it. Maybe you could tell me. I called you by your name... wakko. I called your "friends" the dingdong posse. So was it the dingdong posse that I called your friends the part you found insulting? Is that what made you freak out and go bananas in that thread... like the little boy that you are? Do you find "little boy" to be insulting too? Do you need a tisssew?
posted by Witty at 9:01 AM on February 8, 2006


Nykad: Check your circuits.
I think Matt just wants bevets around because all the other eforums have him...
posted by klangklangston at 9:07 AM on February 8, 2006


So, who's up for severing their own hand?
posted by Mid at 9:10 AM on February 8, 2006


There's still time to make this thread about Witty.
posted by Armitage Shanks

Right you are, Ken!
posted by Kirth Gerson at 9:16 AM on February 8, 2006


So, who's up for severing their own hand?

OOhh, OOOoohhhh!! Me first!! That'll be how you can tell the hep cats from the squares.
posted by Balisong at 9:19 AM on February 8, 2006


As long as it's not my onus hand.
posted by If I Had An Anus at 9:21 AM on February 8, 2006


klangklangston writes "So's Rothko."
I'd disagree. It maybe some personal quirk but for some reason once I recognised bevets' insanity I was able to ignore him and it seems most others could too as he was much less likely to be a force of derailment. Rothko the last couple of weeks couldn't seem to comment in a thread without it going bad.
posted by Mitheral at 9:21 AM on February 8, 2006


I think Matt just wants bevets around because all the other eforums have him...

Indeed. You know you've made it when bevets graces your userlist.
posted by Kwantsar at 9:26 AM on February 8, 2006


you forgot the pancakes.

posted by darukaru at 9:26 AM on February 8, 2006


I can't find my copy of his Screwtop Head comic and it's bumming me out.
posted by klangklangston at 9:32 AM on February 8, 2006


you know, this thread is ripe for witty getting a timeout. not a ban, but a cooldown period.

That said, this particular sketch he's written is brilliant. See, it starts off with witty saying this:

I said the post, the article, was nothing more than an excuse for "wakko and his dingdong posse" to show up and say "America sucks"... which is EXACTLY what you and your dingdong posse did (and do every time someone makes a post of that nature). Sorry if that "insults" you.

Ignoring the fact that witty is saying "I didn't insult you, I just insultingly labeled you as a dingdong," what's the most brilliant bit about this sketch is the 2 lines that follow.

wakko:
Sorry if that "insults" you.

I'm sure you sincerely are.


See, wakko is using sarcasm here to great effect. witty? doesn't quite get it.

witty:

Well, genius, no, I'm not... because I don't see what's insulting about it. Maybe you could tell me. I called you by your name... wakko. I called your "friends" the dingdong posse. So was it the dingdong posse that I called your friends the part you found insulting? Is that what made you freak out and go bananas in that thread... like the little boy that you are? Do you find "little boy" to be insulting too? Do you need a tisssew?

HA! Oh man, move over Ricky Gervais! See, witty sarcastically called wakko a "genius" because he thought wakko didn't get the sarcasm when he said "I'm sorry if that 'insulted' you." But it turns out that witty is the sarcasm "genius" because he totally failed to get wakko's sarcasm in accepting the sarcastic apology! The sniveling shitfit witty then throws afterward, about freaking out, going bananas, needing "tissews" and generally being a "little boy" are just the cherry on top of this comedy-of-manners ice cream sundae.

My hat's off to you, witty, sir! May your glaring inability to maintain a discussion forever provide us with as much entertainment as it has right now... after a timeout of course.
posted by shmegegge at 9:40 AM on February 8, 2006


I dunno. When dios and monjo get going about Supreme Court decisions and such it frequently turns a mediocre thread into a great one. They seem to play off one another really well.

Then there are other threads where dios seems to genuinely disagree with the majority opinion on Metafilter and argues for his beliefs and I think I remember him changing his mind once.

Finally there are other threads where he's pretty much playing contrarian troll for the sheer hell of it.

My point is - pigeonholing most people as always doing X is stupid. There are valid examples (bevets) but they're fewer and farther inbetween than most people think.
posted by Ryvar at 9:52 AM on February 8, 2006


posted by Witty Well, the thread was shitty. The FPP was shitty, for being one link to a news article. And the thread was shitty (at the point of my first comment) because the first several comments were the usual "America sucks", "why do you hate America", etc. I also never said anything was equivalent. What I said was, sometimes dead people still get credit card applications in the mail... which is to say, both situations arise out of what could be nothing more than a clerical error. But of course, I get jumped on for not having any compassion for the guy and being "shitty" because I didn't follow suit with taking jabs at America.

As I said earlier, I didn't say you were shitty for not jumping on the "America Sucks" bandwagon. I said you were shitty for not reading the story and making excuses for the Army. Had you read the story, you would have understood the Army didn't make an error, they made a decision to bill the wounded soldier.
posted by fandango_matt at 9:53 AM on February 8, 2006


I like Dios. He practically defines the act of having moxie!
posted by Astro Zombie at 9:56 AM on February 8, 2006


An almost 24 hours metathread - someone should do a study about the thread mood changes as the planet turns. The funny thing is, I posted it at 4:00, at 5:00 all issues in the original thread had been solved, a little before 8:00 Matt returns and get pissed with Rothko for good. After that absolutely nothing worth happening happened. I wonder if Matt left it open so people could get over Rothko's dismiss or just to see if he could use the banhammer one more time before hanging it back over the fireplace.
posted by nkyad at 9:59 AM on February 8, 2006


yeah, seriously. what was this thread about again?
posted by shmegegge at 10:22 AM on February 8, 2006


I said you were shitty for not reading the story and making excuses for the Army.

Bullshit... and in now way was that ever made clear or even hinted at until now. You're making it up. Once again, just because one little news story says something, doesn't mean it's completely true. But see, that's why the FPP sucked in the first place should have been deleted based on not following the guidelines.
posted by Witty at 10:23 AM on February 8, 2006


yeah, seriously. what was this thread about again?

If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say 'pancakes'.
posted by solid-one-love at 10:26 AM on February 8, 2006


Not bunnies?
posted by nkyad at 10:28 AM on February 8, 2006


I'm easy; I'll eat either.
posted by solid-one-love at 10:30 AM on February 8, 2006


All that is left to do is see who gets a comment closer to the 24 hours mark (3:58 PM).
posted by nkyad at 10:35 AM on February 8, 2006


without going over, or without hitting it? in other words: the very last 3:47pm comment, or the very last 3:48pm comment?
posted by shmegegge at 10:40 AM on February 8, 2006


Without going over. Like "The Price is Right." And if you hit it exactly, you get to pick a $100 bill of Monopoly Money out of mathowie's pocket in front of the whole studio audience.
posted by Gator at 10:43 AM on February 8, 2006


I think the middle 3:58 comment wins - if there are an even number of comments, both central comments divide the prize. If the thread gets closed before 3:58 the last comment wins. Too bad I won't be here to participate, must do something useful (as in going to the drugstore useful) right now. As always, if you get caught by Matt or Jess, we will deny knowledge of your activities.
posted by nkyad at 10:47 AM on February 8, 2006


What's the prize, exactly?
posted by dersins at 10:58 AM on February 8, 2006


"What's the prize, exactly?"

What, the satisfaction of a job well done isn't its own reward?

Kids these days. Sheesh.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 11:12 AM on February 8, 2006




i am going for the 4:20 comment.
posted by wakko at 11:17 AM on February 8, 2006


Now we're having time zone wars, are we? I'm from Saskatchewan, where we have our own time zone that no one else one earth uses. I win!
posted by raedyn at 11:18 AM on February 8, 2006


raedyn writes "I'm from Saskatchewan, where we have our own time zone that no one else one earth uses. I win!"

So do the Newfie's, I wouldn't get too excited.

Actually I wonder if there is a smaller population with it's own standardised time zone (not those places that still figure noon by when the sun is at it's local maximum in the sky) than Newfoundland and Labrador (pop: 515,591, SK: 996,194)?
posted by Mitheral at 11:45 AM on February 8, 2006


Actually I wonder if there is a smaller population with it's own standardised time zone

UTC-2 appears to be pretty damn sparsely populated.
posted by dersins at 12:09 PM on February 8, 2006


As I wrote that, I was thinking of the Newfies. But as I have yet to meet a Newfie on Mefi, I thought I still might win this thread with it.

*sulk*
posted by raedyn at 12:38 PM on February 8, 2006


I think a good solution would be the ability to allow people to be banned from specific threads.

Did I already say that?
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:17 PM on February 8, 2006


That's something I'd support...
posted by klangklangston at 1:20 PM on February 8, 2006


That seems like a pretty good idea.
*ponders*
Then they'd just pollute other threads with what they wanted to say in the threads they're locked out of. Or start new ones.
posted by raedyn at 1:47 PM on February 8, 2006


I can't believe we all haven't been banned from this one yet.
posted by If I Had An Anus at 1:57 PM on February 8, 2006


*pitches tent, plants flag, claims thread for vikings*

That should do it.
posted by raedyn at 1:59 PM on February 8, 2006


"Then they'd just pollute other threads with what they wanted to say in the threads they're locked out of. Or start new ones."
Then it would be totally fair to ban them for good.
posted by klangklangston at 2:19 PM on February 8, 2006


*offers klang a wiener roasting stick*

Beef or veggie dog? The fire's going good now.
posted by raedyn at 2:24 PM on February 8, 2006


Yeah, I really don't see a downside to this, other than matt and jess having to more frequently deal with outraged members who think they've been treating unfairly. (Well, and coding it.) But it sure as hell would improve the site.

I don't think that people would use other threads instead, both because it would almost certainly be very frowned upon by everyone else, but also like klangklangston said, that'd be legitimate and sufficient grounds for sitewide bannination.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 2:57 PM on February 8, 2006


Oh, also, as it is a lot of MeTa threads, at least, are closed for the same purposes that merely banning one or two members from the thread would serve. And then the thread wouldn't have to be closed.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 2:58 PM on February 8, 2006


dersins writes "UTC-2 appears to be pretty damn sparsely populated."

or those guys in UTC-9:30 (V* on the map).
posted by Mitheral at 4:45 PM on February 8, 2006


So this thread is still open. How y'all doin'?
posted by shmegegge at 9:11 PM on February 8, 2006


Saskatchewanians have their own time zone because they find the concept of daylight savings too confusing; they've had several referendums over it.

And they call chocolate milk ViCo and hoodies bunny-hugs!!!

HAHAHAHA!!! Manitoba RUL3Z, Gappers DR00L!!1!
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:09 PM on February 8, 2006


So this thread is still open. How y'all doin'?
Meh, pretty good. Craving me some pancakes, how about you?
posted by arcticwoman at 11:11 PM on February 8, 2006


Stop talking about pancakes, dammit!! I haven't had breakfast today and I am STARVING.
posted by antifuse at 4:01 AM on February 9, 2006


A MountainWings Moment #5166
Wings Over The Mountains of Life

Pancake Lover
=========

The sad, quiet lady with large eyes sat in the psychiatrist's
office while the kind doctor gently asked her why her family
wanted her behind lock and key.

"Now tell me," he said, "what is your trouble?"

"It's just that... just that... well doctor,
it's just that I'm so fond of pancakes."

"Oh," the doctor replied, "is that all?
Why I'm quite fond of pancakes myself."

"Oh doctor, really?" the lady said excitedly.

"The you must come over to our house. I've got trunks and trunks full of them."

Thank you for inviting MountainWings in your website.
See you tomorrow.
posted by Otis at 6:38 AM on February 9, 2006


Man, Raedyn, I really like veggie dogs a lot, but my girlfriend hates 'em and I'm not sure why. Maybe it's because I've been a vegetarian my whole life and she made the switch to it, so she knows what real hot dogs taste like.
posted by klangklangston at 6:54 AM on February 9, 2006


so she knows what real hot dogs taste like.

Bacon's like that. Have a real slice of bacon, and you'll never want the veggie or turkey bacon again.
posted by unreason at 7:10 AM on February 9, 2006


Alvy - Those referrendums were in the 50's. No one still calls chocolate milk "ViCo" (probably because the milk cartons no longer say that).

But they are bunny hugs, damnit.

Well Alvy, I WAS going to invite you to a meetup when I'm in Winterpeg this weekend, but now you've offended my delicate sensibilities and you're dis-invited.

*sniff*

(kidding)
posted by raedyn at 7:19 AM on February 9, 2006


Veggie god for you, beef dog for your lady-friend.
posted by raedyn at 7:20 AM on February 9, 2006


(That's a funny slip of the fingers.)

I've eaten both, klangklagston. I grew up with my parents having joint custody, she was a vegetarian, he was not. I like the veggie alternatives to many of the meats, but to call it a replacement is a sorry lie. They're completely different and both enjoyable in their own right.
posted by raedyn at 7:23 AM on February 9, 2006


Anybody else get the impression that they really fucked with the recipe for Tofurky this year?
posted by cortex at 8:46 AM on February 9, 2006


raedyn - Damn, I never thought I'd need a new sock puppet so soon...
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:28 AM on February 9, 2006


(Urm, just a sock puppet, not a new one.)
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 11:25 AM on February 9, 2006


raedyn, I was a newfie for 12 years, does that count?
posted by edgeways at 11:02 PM on February 10, 2006


I must concede defeat to your one-half-hour-off-the-rest-of-the-country time zone.

*offers a to exchange a bottle of Boh for a bottle of Quidi Vid as a peace making gesture*
posted by raedyn at 10:24 AM on February 11, 2006


« Older What's the policy on removing links?   |   This is a pony that I can ride! Newer »

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