Best of the web? February 10, 2006 5:36 AM Subscribe
It must be viral marketing! /Running around screaming with hands clasped on head
posted by Roger Dodger at 5:58 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by Roger Dodger at 5:58 AM on February 10, 2006
On many days Metafilter is a left-wing news discussion site. Worse, there is a race to post the latest "Bush sucks" news. The volume of the political posts drives the good stuff off the front page more quickly and inhibits real discussion from happening. And it influences the character of our new users, selecting for people who want a political site.
I hate it, but a lot of the new users like it. Short of some kind of strong action from Matt, that is just what Metafilter is becoming.
posted by LarryC at 6:07 AM on February 10, 2006
I hate it, but a lot of the new users like it. Short of some kind of strong action from Matt, that is just what Metafilter is becoming.
posted by LarryC at 6:07 AM on February 10, 2006
Roger Dodger: "It must be viral marketing!"
So this government, it exaggerates?
posted by Plutor at 6:14 AM on February 10, 2006
So this government, it exaggerates?
posted by Plutor at 6:14 AM on February 10, 2006
/Running around screaming with hands clasped on head
Stop that! I'm not supposed to be LOLing at work! Or is it LingOL?
posted by antifuse at 6:20 AM on February 10, 2006
Stop that! I'm not supposed to be LOLing at work! Or is it LingOL?
posted by antifuse at 6:20 AM on February 10, 2006
Worse, there is a race to post the latest "Bush sucks" news.
It's not even a fast race, since I invariably see the stories on other sites first.
posted by smackfu at 6:26 AM on February 10, 2006
It's not even a fast race, since I invariably see the stories on other sites first.
posted by smackfu at 6:26 AM on February 10, 2006
Wingefilter.
Slap Incognito has posted no links 28 comments to MetaFilter
and 3 threads and 11 comments to MetaTalk.
How about YOU posting a FPP.
posted by adamvasco at 6:30 AM on February 10, 2006
Slap Incognito has posted no links 28 comments to MetaFilter
and 3 threads and 11 comments to MetaTalk.
How about YOU posting a FPP.
posted by adamvasco at 6:30 AM on February 10, 2006
I also noticed that at least a few of the commenters in the posts have been lamenting the absence of right-wing posters in these threads and whining that there's no one to make fun of or beat up on.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:40 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:40 AM on February 10, 2006
Which is more offensive to the ear, "Gummint" or "Gubmint"?
posted by Emperor Yamamoto's Eggs at 6:40 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by Emperor Yamamoto's Eggs at 6:40 AM on February 10, 2006
...whining that there's no one to make fun of or beat up on.
posted by jessamyn at 9:40 AM EST on February 10 [!]
That's not what Metafilter is for. That is what having children is for.
posted by ND¢ at 6:45 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by jessamyn at 9:40 AM EST on February 10 [!]
That's not what Metafilter is for. That is what having children is for.
posted by ND¢ at 6:45 AM on February 10, 2006
It's cyclical. In 14 days Metafilter will be ovulating, and the posts will be cool and sexy again.
posted by brownpau at 6:56 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by brownpau at 6:56 AM on February 10, 2006
How about YOU posting a FPP.
posted by adamvasco at blah blah
I never understand this line of thinking. How is more content a cure for bad content? It's at best a dilution, especially if it's forced. Why should people post to MeFi if they don't have anything to say? That's exactly what Slap's complaining about.
Personally, I think we need more anarchist FPPs. The democratic party is just waiting for their chance to screw America just like the the other puppet; the one on the right hand rather than the left. Only armed rebellion can save us now.
posted by Eideteker at 7:02 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by adamvasco at blah blah
I never understand this line of thinking. How is more content a cure for bad content? It's at best a dilution, especially if it's forced. Why should people post to MeFi if they don't have anything to say? That's exactly what Slap's complaining about.
Personally, I think we need more anarchist FPPs. The democratic party is just waiting for their chance to screw America just like the the other puppet; the one on the right hand rather than the left. Only armed rebellion can save us now.
posted by Eideteker at 7:02 AM on February 10, 2006
Which is more offensive to the ear, "Gummint" or "Gubmint"?
Guv'ment
Roger Miller lyrics
Well you dad gum guv'ment you sorry so and so's
You got your damn hands in every pocket of my clothes
Well you dad gum dad gum dad gum guv'ment uh huh
Oh don't you know oh don't you love 'em sometimes uh huh
Well you dad gum guv'ment you better pay attention
You said enough there like a fool's convention
Well you dad gum...
Well you soul sellin' no good son of a shoe fittin' fire starlers
I ought to tear your no good preambulatory bone frame
And nail it to your guv'ment walls all of you you bastard
You dad gum guv'ment you sorry rakafratchits
You got yourself an itch and you want me to scratch it
Well you dad gum...
[ guitar ]
Well you soul sellin'...
Well you dad gum...
posted by COBRA! at 7:04 AM on February 10, 2006
Guv'ment
Roger Miller lyrics
Well you dad gum guv'ment you sorry so and so's
You got your damn hands in every pocket of my clothes
Well you dad gum dad gum dad gum guv'ment uh huh
Oh don't you know oh don't you love 'em sometimes uh huh
Well you dad gum guv'ment you better pay attention
You said enough there like a fool's convention
Well you dad gum...
Well you soul sellin' no good son of a shoe fittin' fire starlers
I ought to tear your no good preambulatory bone frame
And nail it to your guv'ment walls all of you you bastard
You dad gum guv'ment you sorry rakafratchits
You got yourself an itch and you want me to scratch it
Well you dad gum...
[ guitar ]
Well you soul sellin'...
Well you dad gum...
posted by COBRA! at 7:04 AM on February 10, 2006
PS: Slap incognito, why do you hate America? You're either with the lefties, or ag'in 'em.
MeFi Lefties: Wh-wha-WHAT? We engage in the same tactics as the "other side"?
And you wonder why nothing changes. Forget us vs. them. JOIN. OR. DIE. It's the people vs. the government. Support term limits for senators (two four-year terms, please). Buy a gun. It's what our founding fathers would have wanted.
posted by Eideteker at 7:06 AM on February 10, 2006
MeFi Lefties: Wh-wha-WHAT? We engage in the same tactics as the "other side"?
And you wonder why nothing changes. Forget us vs. them. JOIN. OR. DIE. It's the people vs. the government. Support term limits for senators (two four-year terms, please). Buy a gun. It's what our founding fathers would have wanted.
posted by Eideteker at 7:06 AM on February 10, 2006
How about YOU posting a FPP.
I never understand this line of thinking.
Agreed. Making a FPP isn't required, on any level, and has no bearing on why, when or how a member chooses to participate on the website(s).
posted by Witty at 7:08 AM on February 10, 2006
I never understand this line of thinking.
Agreed. Making a FPP isn't required, on any level, and has no bearing on why, when or how a member chooses to participate on the website(s).
posted by Witty at 7:08 AM on February 10, 2006
brownpau writes "In 14 days Metafilter will be ovulating"
Umm, Metafilter eggs. That's a good scramble!
posted by OmieWise at 7:19 AM on February 10, 2006
Umm, Metafilter eggs. That's a good scramble!
posted by OmieWise at 7:19 AM on February 10, 2006
I also noticed that at least a few of the commenters in the posts have been lamenting the absence of right-wing posters in these threads and whining that there's no one to make fun of or beat up on.
It's almost as if they've been making posts for the sole purpose of garnering inflammatory responses. There should be a word for that phenomenon.
posted by darukaru at 7:21 AM on February 10, 2006
It's almost as if they've been making posts for the sole purpose of garnering inflammatory responses. There should be a word for that phenomenon.
posted by darukaru at 7:21 AM on February 10, 2006
If you've never made a post, or make very few, but you complain about the posts other people make, it's like complaining about the way your wife cooks your meals and cleans your house, yet you never lift a finger to help.
And while making a front page post is not required for participation on metafilter, it is required if you're going to gripe about the content of the front page.
posted by crunchland at 7:30 AM on February 10, 2006
And while making a front page post is not required for participation on metafilter, it is required if you're going to gripe about the content of the front page.
posted by crunchland at 7:30 AM on February 10, 2006
It's almost as if they've been making posts for the sole purpose of garnering inflammatory responses. There should be a word for that phenomenon. - darukaru
touché
posted by raedyn at 7:37 AM on February 10, 2006
touché
posted by raedyn at 7:37 AM on February 10, 2006
it's like complaining about the way your wife cooks your meals and cleans your house, yet you never lift a finger to help.
I dunno...I tend to think of it more like, I can't play the piano, I know it, and I'm not fool enough to try at this point, but I know crappy piano playing when I hear it. And it's disappointing to go to your favorite piano bar and hear a lot of crappy piano playing when you're accustomed to lots of good piano playing, and you don't want to have to find a new piano bar. Or something.
posted by Gator at 7:38 AM on February 10, 2006
I dunno...I tend to think of it more like, I can't play the piano, I know it, and I'm not fool enough to try at this point, but I know crappy piano playing when I hear it. And it's disappointing to go to your favorite piano bar and hear a lot of crappy piano playing when you're accustomed to lots of good piano playing, and you don't want to have to find a new piano bar. Or something.
posted by Gator at 7:38 AM on February 10, 2006
If you've never made a post, or make very few, but you complain about the posts other people make, it's like complaining about the way your wife cooks your meals and cleans your house, yet you never lift a finger to help.
If you've made several game efforts over the years at cooking, and it has become clear that by attempting to cook you only bring ruin to good foodstuffs and good crockery and the attitudes of those expected to eat what you cook; if you have studied and done your best to understand the mechanics of the cooking process, and found that, ultimately, your ability to grasp what cooking is does not translate into actually culinary skill; if you love a good meal and wish that those around you would be encouraged to cook in relation to their own abilities to prepare a satisfying meal, something about which you have through painful and disheartening efforts toward self-improvement learned a great deal including your own ill-suitedness toward the executive act of cooking:
then you have every goddam justification for holding forth with an opinion on the subject.
To pretend that every critic of post style and content must have a stable of bristling, beautiful posts to back it is to deny the viability of any sort of discussion of the the quality of posts by any but a small, select few members of the site.
posted by cortex at 7:42 AM on February 10, 2006
If you've made several game efforts over the years at cooking, and it has become clear that by attempting to cook you only bring ruin to good foodstuffs and good crockery and the attitudes of those expected to eat what you cook; if you have studied and done your best to understand the mechanics of the cooking process, and found that, ultimately, your ability to grasp what cooking is does not translate into actually culinary skill; if you love a good meal and wish that those around you would be encouraged to cook in relation to their own abilities to prepare a satisfying meal, something about which you have through painful and disheartening efforts toward self-improvement learned a great deal including your own ill-suitedness toward the executive act of cooking:
then you have every goddam justification for holding forth with an opinion on the subject.
To pretend that every critic of post style and content must have a stable of bristling, beautiful posts to back it is to deny the viability of any sort of discussion of the the quality of posts by any but a small, select few members of the site.
posted by cortex at 7:42 AM on February 10, 2006
To pretend that every critic of post style and content must have a stable of bristling, beautiful posts to back it is to deny the viability of any sort of discussion of the the quality of posts by any but a small, select few members of the site.
Yeah, and what's your point?
posted by crunchland at 7:45 AM on February 10, 2006
Yeah, and what's your point?
posted by crunchland at 7:45 AM on February 10, 2006
That suggestions that no one but a tiny A-list of prolific, consistently strong posters may reasonably debate the qualities of a post is a steaming pile of mindboggling bullshit.
posted by cortex at 7:47 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by cortex at 7:47 AM on February 10, 2006
Two were single-link FPPs
That is not a criteria for quality!(repeat 100 times)
posted by JohnR at 7:47 AM on February 10, 2006
That is not a criteria for quality!(repeat 100 times)
posted by JohnR at 7:47 AM on February 10, 2006
Thanks Gator, I, too, am one of those awful new members who finds Front page posting intimidating, or simply I've felt some of the few ideas I've had are not good enough.
I try to be a supportive member of this community in other ways, and I agree with this call-out.
However, the Cindy Sheehan FPP was (I think?) also a one-link and I found the discussion it generated fascinating, cos the issue went to the heart of what I think are the rights esposed by the USA. So, I don't think there's a fail-safe way of saying, this post is closed because it is ONLY an anti-Bush, rightieMefite, Cat's Paw
posted by Wilder at 7:47 AM on February 10, 2006
I try to be a supportive member of this community in other ways, and I agree with this call-out.
However, the Cindy Sheehan FPP was (I think?) also a one-link and I found the discussion it generated fascinating, cos the issue went to the heart of what I think are the rights esposed by the USA. So, I don't think there's a fail-safe way of saying, this post is closed because it is ONLY an anti-Bush, rightieMefite, Cat's Paw
posted by Wilder at 7:47 AM on February 10, 2006
Don't worry, cortex. A million wild horses could never get the likes of you to shut up about anything, with or without a front page post.
posted by crunchland at 7:49 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by crunchland at 7:49 AM on February 10, 2006
And while making a front page post is not required for participation on metafilter, it is required if you're going to gripe about the content of the front page.
Amen, brother. Nobody is saying every member has to post all of the time (the volume would be crushing), and thought and effort should go into an FPP, but people that don't post and complain all the time come off like comic book guy.
Still, the problem we're talking about here is that there's lots of posting, it's just that it's really redundant. I'm no Bush fan myself, and yet even my eyes start to glaze over when I see yet another one-link post referencing a Washington Post article.
Remember the message on the "Post a Link" page that said give the Katrina related posts a rest for a while? How about a new one, something along the lines of "We get it; Bush sucks. Will this post add something new to the topic?"
posted by Gamblor at 7:53 AM on February 10, 2006
Amen, brother. Nobody is saying every member has to post all of the time (the volume would be crushing), and thought and effort should go into an FPP, but people that don't post and complain all the time come off like comic book guy.
Still, the problem we're talking about here is that there's lots of posting, it's just that it's really redundant. I'm no Bush fan myself, and yet even my eyes start to glaze over when I see yet another one-link post referencing a Washington Post article.
Remember the message on the "Post a Link" page that said give the Katrina related posts a rest for a while? How about a new one, something along the lines of "We get it; Bush sucks. Will this post add something new to the topic?"
posted by Gamblor at 7:53 AM on February 10, 2006
It is true. I run at about 1.5M horsepower. Ford tough.
And I really do think it's that untenable of a position. If you think the entire history of criticism on any subject ever is wasted energy, I can understand how you'd hold the position you're arguing, but if that's not the case I wouldn't mind hearing why Metafilter posts are an exception.
posted by cortex at 7:54 AM on February 10, 2006
And I really do think it's that untenable of a position. If you think the entire history of criticism on any subject ever is wasted energy, I can understand how you'd hold the position you're arguing, but if that's not the case I wouldn't mind hearing why Metafilter posts are an exception.
posted by cortex at 7:54 AM on February 10, 2006
Counterpoint: Currently, the US government IS embroiled in quite a bit of scandal, arguably more than usual. This is naturally reflected in general interest postings.
Still... make a post. There's gotta be somewhere on theweb that you've been that's cool that we haven't.
posted by klangklangston at 8:00 AM on February 10, 2006
Still... make a post. There's gotta be somewhere on theweb that you've been that's cool that we haven't.
posted by klangklangston at 8:00 AM on February 10, 2006
I posted one fpp and it turned out to be a double. Since then, I've been on the lookout for what I think is good for an FPP, but my attempts have been amateurish and I'd rather go for quality than throwing something at the blue and hoping it sticks.
When I find good FPP material that I think you all will enjoy, I'll share it. Until then, yeah, I admit I look like a hypocrite. Sorry about that. But seeing a pile of US-government centric - most of it negative - on the front page irked me, so I called it out.
I also flagged the posts, but hey. I'm only one of many thousands. :)
posted by Slap Incognito at 8:03 AM on February 10, 2006
When I find good FPP material that I think you all will enjoy, I'll share it. Until then, yeah, I admit I look like a hypocrite. Sorry about that. But seeing a pile of US-government centric - most of it negative - on the front page irked me, so I called it out.
I also flagged the posts, but hey. I'm only one of many thousands. :)
posted by Slap Incognito at 8:03 AM on February 10, 2006
How is more content a cure for bad content?
It's not, in itself. But what happens is that a greater quantity of good posts raises the overall bar for all posts. Some posters will think twice before slapping up their SLNF (Single-link NewsFilter) in amongst several scintillating, well-thought-out, arts/culture/technology/science posts. It becomes obvious how terribly lame a post like that is when it's surrounded by much better ones garnering better comments. FPPing should be somewhat intimidating -- you don't put everything you find up there. That's the "filter" part.
So it's not that more content is a cure for bad content; it's that better content is a cure for bad content.
And whenever I see people subscribing to the Myth of Declension (MeFi used to be so much better), I recommend that they go read randomly in the archives. Start with today's date and read 2002 or 2003. It becomes swiftly evident that these arguments have been always with us. It is cyclical, as well. There was a day or two last week when I was astounded by a long string of very high-quality FPPs, and it was also discussed on MeCha how good those few days had been. So let things ebb and flow; having these discussions also acts as a lining-bar, pulling the collective focus back to the 'best of the web' idea.
posted by Miko at 8:09 AM on February 10, 2006
It's not, in itself. But what happens is that a greater quantity of good posts raises the overall bar for all posts. Some posters will think twice before slapping up their SLNF (Single-link NewsFilter) in amongst several scintillating, well-thought-out, arts/culture/technology/science posts. It becomes obvious how terribly lame a post like that is when it's surrounded by much better ones garnering better comments. FPPing should be somewhat intimidating -- you don't put everything you find up there. That's the "filter" part.
So it's not that more content is a cure for bad content; it's that better content is a cure for bad content.
And whenever I see people subscribing to the Myth of Declension (MeFi used to be so much better), I recommend that they go read randomly in the archives. Start with today's date and read 2002 or 2003. It becomes swiftly evident that these arguments have been always with us. It is cyclical, as well. There was a day or two last week when I was astounded by a long string of very high-quality FPPs, and it was also discussed on MeCha how good those few days had been. So let things ebb and flow; having these discussions also acts as a lining-bar, pulling the collective focus back to the 'best of the web' idea.
posted by Miko at 8:09 AM on February 10, 2006
Slap: If you want to post, no one has posted Michael Brown's biting Homeland Security yet. That should garner many comments.
posted by mischief at 8:09 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by mischief at 8:09 AM on February 10, 2006
I also noticed that at least a few of the commenters in the posts have been lamenting the absence of right-wing posters in these threads and whining that there's no one to make fun of or beat up on.
posted by jessamyn at 8:40 AM CST on February 10
You mean an echo chamber isn't stimulating?
posted by dios at 8:11 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by jessamyn at 8:40 AM CST on February 10
You mean an echo chamber isn't stimulating?
posted by dios at 8:11 AM on February 10, 2006
I'd rather go for quality than throwing something at the blue and hoping it sticks.
Thank you for that, you have exactly the right attitude.
posted by LarryC at 8:13 AM on February 10, 2006
Thank you for that, you have exactly the right attitude.
posted by LarryC at 8:13 AM on February 10, 2006
So Like I joined this cool web community called metafilter and I was gonna post this rad FPP on this interesting topic...
but then the Police said they found dem Buffalo. Drat!
posted by Wilder at 8:18 AM on February 10, 2006
but then the Police said they found dem Buffalo. Drat!
posted by Wilder at 8:18 AM on February 10, 2006
That's okay, Slap. US politics at present are a lot like MeFi. A vocal minority are ruining it for the rest of us who just want thought-provoking FPPs and trains that run on time.
And crunchland, I'll start making more FPPs when I get paid for them. I don't have a job that lets me sit in front of the computer all day looking for links to post. It's great that you do, really, but that doesn't give you the excuse to be a dick. You can still be a dick; that's your right as an American. Slap is not (as far as I've seen) a persistent complainer, so your argument holds no water.
posted by Eideteker at 8:25 AM on February 10, 2006
And crunchland, I'll start making more FPPs when I get paid for them. I don't have a job that lets me sit in front of the computer all day looking for links to post. It's great that you do, really, but that doesn't give you the excuse to be a dick. You can still be a dick; that's your right as an American. Slap is not (as far as I've seen) a persistent complainer, so your argument holds no water.
posted by Eideteker at 8:25 AM on February 10, 2006
Apparently, you're willing to criticise and namecall for free though.
posted by crunchland at 8:57 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by crunchland at 8:57 AM on February 10, 2006
If you've never made a post, or make very few, but you complain about the posts other people make, it's like complaining about the way your wife cooks your meals and cleans your house, yet you never lift a finger to help.
By that logic, anyone who has never been president has no right to criticize the president.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 8:58 AM on February 10, 2006
By that logic, anyone who has never been president has no right to criticize the president.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 8:58 AM on February 10, 2006
And while making a front page post is not required for participation on metafilter, it is required if you're going to gripe about the content of the front page.
posted by crunchland
No it's not. Sure, if I picked up the litter from my street I'd be doing my community a service. But by not littering myself I'm also helping my community stay clean.
This whole 'don't like it post something yourself' idea is misguided and not helpful.
On topic, I flagged at least one of the post mentioned. That's about all you can do.
posted by justgary at 8:59 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by crunchland
No it's not. Sure, if I picked up the litter from my street I'd be doing my community a service. But by not littering myself I'm also helping my community stay clean.
This whole 'don't like it post something yourself' idea is misguided and not helpful.
On topic, I flagged at least one of the post mentioned. That's about all you can do.
posted by justgary at 8:59 AM on February 10, 2006
I find it odd that "anti-Bush" posts are supposedly liberal or left-wing. If Bush were a Democrat and pulling all this nonsense there'd be absolutely no difference in the posts here. Being critical of the government is rarely partisan despite the efforts of a select few to make it so. The left/right dynamic, is, for the most party, lazy. I don't see Mefi as anywhere remotely political. Posts that do deal with politicians are often posted, but the quality ones are from diverse sources that can be out of the mainstream (and indeed, that is the point of many of them as well.) Those that are from CNN for example, usually get called out quickly and are often removed.
Furthermore, the flagging system and great discussions like this effectively, in my humble opinion, sustain the overall quality of the site and therefore the experience.
I still favour the not interested, skip over rule. It's a diverse community and interests and therefore judgement about quality differ. That said, you can be entirely disinterested in something and realize it's quality is lacking but as was mentioned above, a single link means nothing in regard to the quality of the post and some criticism seems to be based predominantly on interest.
Then we have the tired echo chamber rhetoric. If the point of the site is the quality of the posts or links, then the discussion is secondary. If a lot of people happen to agree that breaking the law for example, or exploitation for example, or torture, for example, are bad things it is not an echo chamber.
The issue is still discussed and points made. Questions are asked and answered. Unfortunately, there are a few here who see things in black and white and willfully and knowingly ignore the most basic princiiples of discussion and argument and pretend they don't. But that is taking issue with the quality of the discussion, which is different than the quality of the post, which is what this is about no?
posted by juiceCake at 9:02 AM on February 10, 2006
Furthermore, the flagging system and great discussions like this effectively, in my humble opinion, sustain the overall quality of the site and therefore the experience.
I still favour the not interested, skip over rule. It's a diverse community and interests and therefore judgement about quality differ. That said, you can be entirely disinterested in something and realize it's quality is lacking but as was mentioned above, a single link means nothing in regard to the quality of the post and some criticism seems to be based predominantly on interest.
Then we have the tired echo chamber rhetoric. If the point of the site is the quality of the posts or links, then the discussion is secondary. If a lot of people happen to agree that breaking the law for example, or exploitation for example, or torture, for example, are bad things it is not an echo chamber.
The issue is still discussed and points made. Questions are asked and answered. Unfortunately, there are a few here who see things in black and white and willfully and knowingly ignore the most basic princiiples of discussion and argument and pretend they don't. But that is taking issue with the quality of the discussion, which is different than the quality of the post, which is what this is about no?
posted by juiceCake at 9:02 AM on February 10, 2006
I would just like to add my opinion that I PREFER single link posts. If the first link isn't interesting enough to post alone, it shouldn't be posted, ever. But that's my opinion.
And since no one is allowed to criticize unless they are currently running their own website with a million+ visitors a day, have won an Oscar for an FPP and quite possibly have cured cancer via a Metafilter post I say we gather a small cabal of well-respected MeFites that meet those criteria, and email them all our complaints which they can then post to the grey under a veil of "approval" by those who think less of us.
In summary: A bad post is a bad post, who cares who points it out? I'm grateful that someone points it and doesn't let it slide off into the ether.
posted by blue_beetle at 9:07 AM on February 10, 2006
And since no one is allowed to criticize unless they are currently running their own website with a million+ visitors a day, have won an Oscar for an FPP and quite possibly have cured cancer via a Metafilter post I say we gather a small cabal of well-respected MeFites that meet those criteria, and email them all our complaints which they can then post to the grey under a veil of "approval" by those who think less of us.
In summary: A bad post is a bad post, who cares who points it out? I'm grateful that someone points it and doesn't let it slide off into the ether.
posted by blue_beetle at 9:07 AM on February 10, 2006
I find it odd that "anti-Bush" posts are supposedly liberal or left-wing. If Bush were a Democrat and pulling all this nonsense there'd be absolutely no difference in the posts here. Being critical of the government is rarely partisan despite the efforts of a select few to make it so. The left/right dynamic, is, for the most party, lazy. I don't see Mefi as anywhere remotely political.
Are you serious?
posted by dios at 9:08 AM on February 10, 2006
Are you serious?
posted by dios at 9:08 AM on February 10, 2006
And to what end will all this complaining by arm-chair front page posters come to? "Oh, the front page sucks, but I'm not gonna lift a finger to do anything about it until I get paid to do it. This sucks, that sucks, sucks, sucks, sucks. (Forget about the fact that I commented in all the threads I say sucked, or that I spend 12 hours a day refreshing metafilter and metatalk) ... but, I just can't be bothered to actually search for anything new or different."
So in the end, if you're not willing to present a better version of the front page, and the people who are willing to post will keep on posting stuff that doesn't meet with your exacting standards of what should or shouldn't be on the front page, where does this sort of complaining take us?
Nowhere. 300 comment threads in Metatalk going round and round and round and round.
So yeah. Don't post anything better. Complain. Use me as your lightning rod, if you must, and go round and round and round and round...
posted by crunchland at 9:16 AM on February 10, 2006
So in the end, if you're not willing to present a better version of the front page, and the people who are willing to post will keep on posting stuff that doesn't meet with your exacting standards of what should or shouldn't be on the front page, where does this sort of complaining take us?
Nowhere. 300 comment threads in Metatalk going round and round and round and round.
So yeah. Don't post anything better. Complain. Use me as your lightning rod, if you must, and go round and round and round and round...
posted by crunchland at 9:16 AM on February 10, 2006
> "I don't WANT to be exposed to US government!"
"Oh, you can't help that."
posted by jfuller at 9:29 AM on February 10, 2006
"Oh, you can't help that."
posted by jfuller at 9:29 AM on February 10, 2006
dios: I remember when Clinton was in charge & there were many posts/comments criticising the man/his policies/his govt. If you're in charge of the show you're going to get the grief.
As for the general political spectrum...well, I'll guess that most non-USians find the US political spread pretty right-leaning. In the global scheme of things there is no left-wing in US politics.
The fact that MeFi has more left/progressive/anti-govt. aspects does make it a more worldly place. If it was a direct reflection of mainstream US politics & media I -- and I suspect many non-USians -- would be out of here pronto.
[I bring this up as a general point/observation rather wanting to get involved in a ruck.]
posted by i_cola at 9:37 AM on February 10, 2006
As for the general political spectrum...well, I'll guess that most non-USians find the US political spread pretty right-leaning. In the global scheme of things there is no left-wing in US politics.
The fact that MeFi has more left/progressive/anti-govt. aspects does make it a more worldly place. If it was a direct reflection of mainstream US politics & media I -- and I suspect many non-USians -- would be out of here pronto.
[I bring this up as a general point/observation rather wanting to get involved in a ruck.]
posted by i_cola at 9:37 AM on February 10, 2006
Re: poli- and newsfilter: It's a losing battle. I used to complain about it all the time, but Matt has clearly decided not to delete any more than the worst of the bunch, and similarly has decided not to send the political discussion over to more political sites live Devoter. I think it detracts from the site, but then again, I'm sure the political threads drive a pretty significant chunk of MetaFilter's traffic. You can complain until you're blue in the face, but unless Matt radically shifts his policy regarding deletion, there won't be any change.
Re: MetaFilter's political landscape: It seems to me that there is a highly vocal minority of democratic/liberal/leftist members, and a much smaller but equally vocal minority of conservative members. Most members, even active members, fall somewhere in between. Membership is governed by a bell curve, but participation is governed by a power law.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 9:46 AM on February 10, 2006
Re: MetaFilter's political landscape: It seems to me that there is a highly vocal minority of democratic/liberal/leftist members, and a much smaller but equally vocal minority of conservative members. Most members, even active members, fall somewhere in between. Membership is governed by a bell curve, but participation is governed by a power law.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 9:46 AM on February 10, 2006
Yeah people on MetaFilter are so US-centric. We need to remember that there are other corrupt, evil governments in the world to hate and fear.
posted by scarabic at 10:00 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by scarabic at 10:00 AM on February 10, 2006
juiceCake: "I find it odd that "anti-Bush" posts are supposedly liberal or left-wing. If Bush were a Democrat and pulling all this nonsense there'd be absolutely no difference in the posts here. Being critical of the government is rarely partisan despite the efforts of a select few to make it so. The left/right dynamic, is, for the most party, lazy. I don't see Mefi as anywhere remotely political."
dios: "Are you serious?"
I'm with dios. We just learned that there's activity in the brain's pleasure centers when you reject information that doesn't agree with your POV. I may disagree vehemently with the current administration, but I can't say that if Bush was a Democrat I would disagree just as strongly.
posted by Plutor at 10:02 AM on February 10, 2006
dios: "Are you serious?"
I'm with dios. We just learned that there's activity in the brain's pleasure centers when you reject information that doesn't agree with your POV. I may disagree vehemently with the current administration, but I can't say that if Bush was a Democrat I would disagree just as strongly.
posted by Plutor at 10:02 AM on February 10, 2006
I'm sure the political threads drive a pretty significant chunk of MetaFilter's traffic
Which nowadays would mean "drive a pretty significant chunk of Matt's bread and butter."
It may not be a philosophical point anymore.
posted by scarabic at 10:03 AM on February 10, 2006
Which nowadays would mean "drive a pretty significant chunk of Matt's bread and butter."
It may not be a philosophical point anymore.
posted by scarabic at 10:03 AM on February 10, 2006
I mean to say that I can't say for sure how I'd feel. I'd like to think that I would be anti-stupid-decisions no matter the party. But I can't rule out rationalizing it.
posted by Plutor at 10:03 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by Plutor at 10:03 AM on February 10, 2006
"Apparently, you're willing to criticise and namecall for free though."
That was my point, Capt. Crunch. Criticism is free, and it exists no matter what guidelines or rules you think should govern it. So rather than tear down Slap's criticism, perhaps you could throw in some helpful advice? Your user page is very helpful; perhaps you could direct Slappy to it, make a few suggestions. Your last comment was more in this direction, and I liked it for that.
I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings, but as Gator said, some of us view MeFi as a bar. It's more of a hobby than a job; it's a place to go for entertainment or information. If your favorite bar was turned into a cafe filled with angry protestors ranting all day and all night, you'd probably stop going. The solution is not to get behind the bar and start dispensing drinks. You can either try to start your own conversations and bring your own friends who share your interests, or you can stop going there and find a new place. And in an atmosphere of angry (and often empty) rhetoric and political shouting, it's hard to start a conversation on a different topic for fear of being shouted down or drowned out. And if your friends get dragged into those mindless political discussion (which is a lot like those pointless discussions about how your team needs to score more points if they're going to win more games), you've just made the problem worse. I'm loathe to recommend MeFi to friends because of it. (I can hear a collective "yay!" through the crowd, but my friends are all nicer than I am, really they are.) Oh, and also because of the exclusivity and elitism you espouse. You may have a better idea of what makes a good FPP, experientially, but it's entirely fallacious and fatuous to imply that that means I and others with single digit numbers of FPPs have NO idea what makes a good FPP. It's not an all or none proposition, Cap'n.
posted by Eideteker at 10:05 AM on February 10, 2006
That was my point, Capt. Crunch. Criticism is free, and it exists no matter what guidelines or rules you think should govern it. So rather than tear down Slap's criticism, perhaps you could throw in some helpful advice? Your user page is very helpful; perhaps you could direct Slappy to it, make a few suggestions. Your last comment was more in this direction, and I liked it for that.
I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings, but as Gator said, some of us view MeFi as a bar. It's more of a hobby than a job; it's a place to go for entertainment or information. If your favorite bar was turned into a cafe filled with angry protestors ranting all day and all night, you'd probably stop going. The solution is not to get behind the bar and start dispensing drinks. You can either try to start your own conversations and bring your own friends who share your interests, or you can stop going there and find a new place. And in an atmosphere of angry (and often empty) rhetoric and political shouting, it's hard to start a conversation on a different topic for fear of being shouted down or drowned out. And if your friends get dragged into those mindless political discussion (which is a lot like those pointless discussions about how your team needs to score more points if they're going to win more games), you've just made the problem worse. I'm loathe to recommend MeFi to friends because of it. (I can hear a collective "yay!" through the crowd, but my friends are all nicer than I am, really they are.) Oh, and also because of the exclusivity and elitism you espouse. You may have a better idea of what makes a good FPP, experientially, but it's entirely fallacious and fatuous to imply that that means I and others with single digit numbers of FPPs have NO idea what makes a good FPP. It's not an all or none proposition, Cap'n.
posted by Eideteker at 10:05 AM on February 10, 2006
blue_beetle writes "I would just like to add my opinion that I PREFER single link posts. If the first link isn't interesting enough to post alone, it shouldn't be posted, ever. But that's my opinion."
I agree that a good single link can make for some of the best FPPs (although it isn't really my style of post), but I think that a single NEWS link almost never meets the criteria of sufficient interest to make a great FPP. And a single oped link, especially on a current news story? Fuggedaboudit.
posted by OmieWise at 10:05 AM on February 10, 2006
I agree that a good single link can make for some of the best FPPs (although it isn't really my style of post), but I think that a single NEWS link almost never meets the criteria of sufficient interest to make a great FPP. And a single oped link, especially on a current news story? Fuggedaboudit.
posted by OmieWise at 10:05 AM on February 10, 2006
PoliticalNewsFilter is often crappy. Single-link posts are not necessarily bad.
It seems that there's a general consensus on that. Part of the reason that people are driven to post those links can be ascribed to pure outrage and a sense of impotence. It's so 'in-your-face', that it's hard to avoid. I see this stuff on the news [less on the 'news' and more on independent media] and it continues to blow my mind; it seems to be getting worse and worse everyday, almost farcicial. Partisan issues aside, an awful lot of people in the U.S. are beginning to realize what a mess we're in, and a great deal of the rest of the world is horrified and disgusted at our administrations' behavior and what's taken to be our [USians] collective apathy in dealing with it.
Whether it's Gitmo or warrantless wiretapping, lying and then admitting the lying with the attitude of 'so what? I've got you all frightened, so whatcha gonna do about it", all piss people off, on both sides of the aisle.
I don't argue politics very much-- I leave it for the regulars-- I do enjoy reading others' opinions, esp. when it's a) backed up by evidence, and b) not shrilly. It helps me to understand others' reasoning, and helps me to concretize or crystallize my own position on some issues.
I like the bar analogy OmieWise just used. In my social circle, which is fairly varied, I like to talk politics, religion, food, sex, art, music, literature, &c.
If I don't like the conversation, I can just have another one. Preventing people from talking about what they feel to be important isn't going to change anything.
posted by exlotuseater at 10:35 AM on February 10, 2006
It seems that there's a general consensus on that. Part of the reason that people are driven to post those links can be ascribed to pure outrage and a sense of impotence. It's so 'in-your-face', that it's hard to avoid. I see this stuff on the news [less on the 'news' and more on independent media] and it continues to blow my mind; it seems to be getting worse and worse everyday, almost farcicial. Partisan issues aside, an awful lot of people in the U.S. are beginning to realize what a mess we're in, and a great deal of the rest of the world is horrified and disgusted at our administrations' behavior and what's taken to be our [USians] collective apathy in dealing with it.
Whether it's Gitmo or warrantless wiretapping, lying and then admitting the lying with the attitude of 'so what? I've got you all frightened, so whatcha gonna do about it", all piss people off, on both sides of the aisle.
I don't argue politics very much-- I leave it for the regulars-- I do enjoy reading others' opinions, esp. when it's a) backed up by evidence, and b) not shrilly. It helps me to understand others' reasoning, and helps me to concretize or crystallize my own position on some issues.
I like the bar analogy OmieWise just used. In my social circle, which is fairly varied, I like to talk politics, religion, food, sex, art, music, literature, &c.
If I don't like the conversation, I can just have another one. Preventing people from talking about what they feel to be important isn't going to change anything.
posted by exlotuseater at 10:35 AM on February 10, 2006
not OmieWise- Eideteker used the bar analogy. so sorry.
posted by exlotuseater at 10:37 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by exlotuseater at 10:37 AM on February 10, 2006
well said, exlotus
think of the front page as a buffet or potluck supper--you can circle the tables all you want, but the stuff you want is not going to magically appear unless someone cooks it and puts it there. If they haven't put it there that day, either put something there yourself or come back tomorrow.
posted by amberglow at 10:58 AM on February 10, 2006
think of the front page as a buffet or potluck supper--you can circle the tables all you want, but the stuff you want is not going to magically appear unless someone cooks it and puts it there. If they haven't put it there that day, either put something there yourself or come back tomorrow.
posted by amberglow at 10:58 AM on February 10, 2006
However, the Cindy Sheehan FPP was (I think?) also a one-link and I found the discussion it generated fascinating, cos the issue went to the heart of what I think are the rights esposed by the USA.
We see this kind of reasonaing all the time too. It's cool that the resulting conversation was "fascinating" and enjoyable for everyone. But a great discussion does not mean the original FPP was great or acceptable in terms of how relates to the guidelines. Most of time, a one-link post, especially to a news story of some kind (unless it's earth-shattering like a tsunami or something) can be classified as not-so-good. The resulting THREAD might be awesome. But you can chalk that up to "luck of the draw". Frontpage posting is about craftsmanship and effort. The exception I guess, is the one-linker to something bizarre or a novelty of some kind (a game, a video, etc.)... something that without Metafilter, would be otherwise hard to find on your own. But a post that links to a WaPo article about what happened in the U.S. Congress today just isn't what Metafilter is supposed to be filtering (in my opinion of course).
posted by Witty at 11:06 AM on February 10, 2006
We see this kind of reasonaing all the time too. It's cool that the resulting conversation was "fascinating" and enjoyable for everyone. But a great discussion does not mean the original FPP was great or acceptable in terms of how relates to the guidelines. Most of time, a one-link post, especially to a news story of some kind (unless it's earth-shattering like a tsunami or something) can be classified as not-so-good. The resulting THREAD might be awesome. But you can chalk that up to "luck of the draw". Frontpage posting is about craftsmanship and effort. The exception I guess, is the one-linker to something bizarre or a novelty of some kind (a game, a video, etc.)... something that without Metafilter, would be otherwise hard to find on your own. But a post that links to a WaPo article about what happened in the U.S. Congress today just isn't what Metafilter is supposed to be filtering (in my opinion of course).
posted by Witty at 11:06 AM on February 10, 2006
Face it, there are no posting guidelines anymore. Hell, even double-posts are acceptable nowadays. Self-link? Just get someone else to post your site for you. heheh
posted by mischief at 11:17 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by mischief at 11:17 AM on February 10, 2006
This is worse than mediocre political posts, anyway.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 11:26 AM on February 10, 2006
posted by monju_bosatsu at 11:26 AM on February 10, 2006
think of the front page as a buffet or potluck supper--you can circle the tables all you want, but the stuff you want is not going to magically appear unless someone cooks it and puts it there.
Which isn't the point of this thread at all. If a lot of crappy cooks put their dishes on the table, and you don't have time to find what is actually edible, then you're out of luck. Bringing your own dish solves nothing.
That's where the 'filter' part of metafilter comes in, long forgotten and ignored.
posted by justgary at 11:26 AM on February 10, 2006
Which isn't the point of this thread at all. If a lot of crappy cooks put their dishes on the table, and you don't have time to find what is actually edible, then you're out of luck. Bringing your own dish solves nothing.
That's where the 'filter' part of metafilter comes in, long forgotten and ignored.
posted by justgary at 11:26 AM on February 10, 2006
think of the front page as a buffet or potluck supper--you can circle the tables all you want, but the stuff you want is not going to magically appear unless someone cooks it and puts it there. If they haven't put it there that day, either put something there yourself or come back tomorrow.
amberglow said it well.
crunchland: I suspect that you and I pretty much agree on that very point. I don't claim that criticism causes good posts to appear magically out of the AEther, though I believe that discussion and criticism of posts can lead to better future posts by the folks who take something from the discussion.
I would post on a regular basis if I had the natural inclination and breadth of knowledge that lent itself to quality posts, but that doesn't seem to be me. I am a bad cook, to go back to my earlier analogy.
And I pointedly refrain from posting all sorts of interesting/amusing things that, for their small merits, don't strike me as being worthy of the front page. On that front, I could be diluting the front page with mildly amusing local news events and flash memes that no one else caught, but I don't think that's a good plan. I like junkfood, but I know that it's junkfood, and I'm not putting it on the table.
That's where I see the situation as being more complex than a "put up or shut up" answer. I'm goddamned interested in the quality and nature of the site, and I'm going to speak (to, yes, unstoppable, horse-defying, even -- dare I say it -- EBish lengths) on the subject when it comes up because I care about the site.
And if I ever manage to come across something interesting and unique, or focus one of my hobbies into the background of a subject that would make a decent post, I promise you that I will put it out there. But I'm neither going to fling shit randomly at the front page or pretend that I don't have reasonable critical reactions to the things other people post.
As for you being treated as a lightning rod -- you're person in the thread most vocally defending the position you stated earlier. Of course you're getting responses. I'm sorry if people have been disrespectful, I'm sorry if I've attacked you rather than the idea, but please don't act like getting a response to your contentious position is uncalled for.
posted by cortex at 11:32 AM on February 10, 2006
amberglow said it well.
crunchland: I suspect that you and I pretty much agree on that very point. I don't claim that criticism causes good posts to appear magically out of the AEther, though I believe that discussion and criticism of posts can lead to better future posts by the folks who take something from the discussion.
I would post on a regular basis if I had the natural inclination and breadth of knowledge that lent itself to quality posts, but that doesn't seem to be me. I am a bad cook, to go back to my earlier analogy.
And I pointedly refrain from posting all sorts of interesting/amusing things that, for their small merits, don't strike me as being worthy of the front page. On that front, I could be diluting the front page with mildly amusing local news events and flash memes that no one else caught, but I don't think that's a good plan. I like junkfood, but I know that it's junkfood, and I'm not putting it on the table.
That's where I see the situation as being more complex than a "put up or shut up" answer. I'm goddamned interested in the quality and nature of the site, and I'm going to speak (to, yes, unstoppable, horse-defying, even -- dare I say it -- EBish lengths) on the subject when it comes up because I care about the site.
And if I ever manage to come across something interesting and unique, or focus one of my hobbies into the background of a subject that would make a decent post, I promise you that I will put it out there. But I'm neither going to fling shit randomly at the front page or pretend that I don't have reasonable critical reactions to the things other people post.
As for you being treated as a lightning rod -- you're person in the thread most vocally defending the position you stated earlier. Of course you're getting responses. I'm sorry if people have been disrespectful, I'm sorry if I've attacked you rather than the idea, but please don't act like getting a response to your contentious position is uncalled for.
posted by cortex at 11:32 AM on February 10, 2006
Sigh. Eight crappy political FPPs made today since this thread began. Thanks for trying Slap. But those of who prefer the old "best of the web" idea of Metafilter have long since been outnumbered, and there is nothing to be done about it.
posted by LarryC at 12:24 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by LarryC at 12:24 PM on February 10, 2006
I think that a single NEWS link almost never meets the criteria of sufficient interest to make a great FPP. And a single oped link, especially on a current news story? Fuggedaboudit.
I agree with this, and yet they're often not flagged and are heavily participated in. Newsfilter links are still a grey area where pulling a thread with comments in it is going to get people coming to MetaTalk having the Great Free Speech Debate again. This is double-true because they're mostly political posts, which leads to a lot of censorship discussion, which rarely goes anyplace. I've been trying to axe more of them earlier, but usually I only do it if the flags point that way or if mathowie and I agree that it has to go.
Face it, there are no posting guidelines anymore. Hell, even double-posts are acceptable nowadays. Self-link? Just get someone else to post your site for you. heheh
You say this or some variant in a lot of MeTa threads lately, and I don't think it's true. We remove plenty of double-posts and ban a lot of self-linkers. Projects is by design intended to make sure that having a MeFi login doesn't preclude good content from getting to MeFi users so if you're talking about pseudo-self-links coming from there, that's what it's for. If that's not what you mean, perhaps you could step up and drop one of us an email if you think the rules are being terribly and irreparably broken. I spend a lot of time here, and I don't see it.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:26 PM on February 10, 2006
I agree with this, and yet they're often not flagged and are heavily participated in. Newsfilter links are still a grey area where pulling a thread with comments in it is going to get people coming to MetaTalk having the Great Free Speech Debate again. This is double-true because they're mostly political posts, which leads to a lot of censorship discussion, which rarely goes anyplace. I've been trying to axe more of them earlier, but usually I only do it if the flags point that way or if mathowie and I agree that it has to go.
Face it, there are no posting guidelines anymore. Hell, even double-posts are acceptable nowadays. Self-link? Just get someone else to post your site for you. heheh
You say this or some variant in a lot of MeTa threads lately, and I don't think it's true. We remove plenty of double-posts and ban a lot of self-linkers. Projects is by design intended to make sure that having a MeFi login doesn't preclude good content from getting to MeFi users so if you're talking about pseudo-self-links coming from there, that's what it's for. If that's not what you mean, perhaps you could step up and drop one of us an email if you think the rules are being terribly and irreparably broken. I spend a lot of time here, and I don't see it.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:26 PM on February 10, 2006
The filter is busted. It's like flour through a tennis racket. So many of the links in the last 24 hours weren't passed through any sort of qualitative analysis like "is this a good and unique link that people haven't seen before".... you know the rejoinder that is right off the bat in the guidelines.
posted by dios at 12:32 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by dios at 12:32 PM on February 10, 2006
I thought today's links were great. Sure there was some news, but also a lot of good, interesting posts.
Like sugar through a tennis racket.
posted by smackfu at 12:43 PM on February 10, 2006
Like sugar through a tennis racket.
posted by smackfu at 12:43 PM on February 10, 2006
It seems pretty obvious to me that:
A) A lot of people on metafilter like talking about politics.
B) A lot of people on metafilter would rather just have cool stuff from the web without the politics.
C) Asking people to cut down on newsfilter posts is a losing proposition, mostly because of point A).
So why not create a news.metafilter.com section and make everybody happy?
The people that want The Blue to be back the way it used to be will get it, and the news/politics threads (which I actually enjoy a great deal) will still be able to continue.
posted by empath at 12:48 PM on February 10, 2006
A) A lot of people on metafilter like talking about politics.
B) A lot of people on metafilter would rather just have cool stuff from the web without the politics.
C) Asking people to cut down on newsfilter posts is a losing proposition, mostly because of point A).
So why not create a news.metafilter.com section and make everybody happy?
The people that want The Blue to be back the way it used to be will get it, and the news/politics threads (which I actually enjoy a great deal) will still be able to continue.
posted by empath at 12:48 PM on February 10, 2006
LarryC has made the only argument here as to why news-filter FPP's are bad: they push stuff off of the front page.
That argument has some merit, but not a whole lot. If you don't like the newsfilter, don't go into the thread. Just move on--it's really that simple. If there's a thread you do like, you might have to click "next page" a few times. Who cares?
Tastes, opinions, assholes people. If you don't see a lot of interesting, non-political FPP's in the last week along with good discussion, you're blind.
posted by bardic at 1:11 PM on February 10, 2006
That argument has some merit, but not a whole lot. If you don't like the newsfilter, don't go into the thread. Just move on--it's really that simple. If there's a thread you do like, you might have to click "next page" a few times. Who cares?
Tastes, opinions, assholes people. If you don't see a lot of interesting, non-political FPP's in the last week along with good discussion, you're blind.
posted by bardic at 1:11 PM on February 10, 2006
I dunno, bardic. I can think of at least one mefite who, by all appearances, does not.
posted by cortex at 1:15 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by cortex at 1:15 PM on February 10, 2006
amberglow said it well.
Then change the name of the site. There is a percentage of users, amberglow, from what i've read, being one of them, who believe nothing should be deleted, that it's our job to skip what we don't like, that it's our job to filter.
Which is fine. But thank god matt disagrees (at least a tiny bit) or metafilter would go straight to hell.
posted by justgary at 1:21 PM on February 10, 2006
Then change the name of the site. There is a percentage of users, amberglow, from what i've read, being one of them, who believe nothing should be deleted, that it's our job to skip what we don't like, that it's our job to filter.
Which is fine. But thank god matt disagrees (at least a tiny bit) or metafilter would go straight to hell.
posted by justgary at 1:21 PM on February 10, 2006
We have blinds?
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:21 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:21 PM on February 10, 2006
"So why not create a news.metafilter.com section and make everybody happy?"
Yeah, that's a solution that Matt has unambiguously rejected. I think that's unfortunate.
I'm really tempted to start lurking a few of the bigger right-wing websites, and start using them to find stuff to post newspolifilter. The only problem with that idea is that I would expose myself to anus, and I'd rather not.
It's always seemed to me that while I agree that what is done with newspolifilter is in general a good thing (because I agree with the viewpoint that's represented), that kind of weblog and community is far less rare than is mefi's "best of the web" community. Why turn mefi into something less distinct?
As for the whole "complain only if you post" point of view, I think that it's wrong to entirely dismiss it, or to totally support it. It's better than not to have posted good FPPs when being critical of FPPs in general, but that doesn't mean that non-posters don't or shouldn't have a voice.
We don't necessarily need more good posts, as I would judge them, because with the membership jump, there's plenty every day. But they're being lost among the greater number of newspolifolter posts. "Ignore the posts you don't like" is not as easy as it sounds, in practice—speaking for myself, the more I look at a screenful of the front page and I see only newspolifilter posts that do not at all interest me, the more I'm driven away from mefi and the less often I will scan the front page for posts to read. That's basic human nature and I can't be the only one who feels and behaves this way.
And, not coincidentally, there is never, ever a polifilter Bush/War/etc post on a subject I haven't already seen elsewhere, and with better sources. Ironically, the larger bulk of these posts are made by people like myself and none of us need mefi to keep plugged-in to what's happening. That means that the greatest utility that newspolifilter has to people are when it brings something to the attention to those who aren't motivated enough to have already learned about it elsewhere(s), and when providing a forum of mostly liked-minded, intelligent and well-informed people with whom to discuss these issues. But I just don't see those activities in mefi's mandate; they're not explicitly exlcuded—but then a whole host of noxious activities aren't explicitly excluded, so we can't assume they were implicitly included. (Why do I feel like I'm making an argument to SCOTUS?)
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:46 PM on February 10, 2006
Yeah, that's a solution that Matt has unambiguously rejected. I think that's unfortunate.
I'm really tempted to start lurking a few of the bigger right-wing websites, and start using them to find stuff to post newspolifilter. The only problem with that idea is that I would expose myself to anus, and I'd rather not.
It's always seemed to me that while I agree that what is done with newspolifilter is in general a good thing (because I agree with the viewpoint that's represented), that kind of weblog and community is far less rare than is mefi's "best of the web" community. Why turn mefi into something less distinct?
As for the whole "complain only if you post" point of view, I think that it's wrong to entirely dismiss it, or to totally support it. It's better than not to have posted good FPPs when being critical of FPPs in general, but that doesn't mean that non-posters don't or shouldn't have a voice.
We don't necessarily need more good posts, as I would judge them, because with the membership jump, there's plenty every day. But they're being lost among the greater number of newspolifolter posts. "Ignore the posts you don't like" is not as easy as it sounds, in practice—speaking for myself, the more I look at a screenful of the front page and I see only newspolifilter posts that do not at all interest me, the more I'm driven away from mefi and the less often I will scan the front page for posts to read. That's basic human nature and I can't be the only one who feels and behaves this way.
And, not coincidentally, there is never, ever a polifilter Bush/War/etc post on a subject I haven't already seen elsewhere, and with better sources. Ironically, the larger bulk of these posts are made by people like myself and none of us need mefi to keep plugged-in to what's happening. That means that the greatest utility that newspolifilter has to people are when it brings something to the attention to those who aren't motivated enough to have already learned about it elsewhere(s), and when providing a forum of mostly liked-minded, intelligent and well-informed people with whom to discuss these issues. But I just don't see those activities in mefi's mandate; they're not explicitly exlcuded—but then a whole host of noxious activities aren't explicitly excluded, so we can't assume they were implicitly included. (Why do I feel like I'm making an argument to SCOTUS?)
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:46 PM on February 10, 2006
justgary, I said amberglow said that well because he stated, fairly simply and clearly, a principle that over which I feel like I've butting heads with crunchland over despite my suspicion that he and I actually agree for the most part. It was not intended as a blanket endorsement of amberglow's (alleged, I haven't been tracking) or anyone else's no-delete policy, which I disagree is something I actually disagree with.
posted by cortex at 1:48 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by cortex at 1:48 PM on February 10, 2006
Er. That is, I actually disagree with a general no-delete policy.
posted by cortex at 1:50 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by cortex at 1:50 PM on February 10, 2006
Whaaaaat?
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:51 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:51 PM on February 10, 2006
the more I look at a screenful of the front page and I see only newspolifilter posts that do not at all interest me, the more I'm driven away from mefi and the less often I will scan the front page for posts to read.
I'm using an RSS reader, and if I don't check MeFi between now and Sunday afternoon, there will be sixty posts waiting for me when I do. And, from experience, I know that the overwhelming majority of them will be of the "Can you believe the shit Bush is doing?" variety. When I see that, I hardly feel inspired to slog through all the posts to find the ones I think are worth reading. I imagine that without a RSS reader, people are even less inclined to sift throught the backlog.
A lot of (imo) good, original posts get pushed off the front page so quickly that they don't get the exposure they deserve, and that's a shame.
posted by Gamblor at 2:01 PM on February 10, 2006
I'm using an RSS reader, and if I don't check MeFi between now and Sunday afternoon, there will be sixty posts waiting for me when I do. And, from experience, I know that the overwhelming majority of them will be of the "Can you believe the shit Bush is doing?" variety. When I see that, I hardly feel inspired to slog through all the posts to find the ones I think are worth reading. I imagine that without a RSS reader, people are even less inclined to sift throught the backlog.
A lot of (imo) good, original posts get pushed off the front page so quickly that they don't get the exposure they deserve, and that's a shame.
posted by Gamblor at 2:01 PM on February 10, 2006
I'm very opposed to the creation of NewsFilter. Here's why.
MetaFilter is loved by so many because it's a one-stop (mostly) intelligent discussion which can reach to cover just about all topics, current and historical. I would never bother to go to a NewsFilter site, because I come here for the discussion, not the news. I appreciate seeing news and political topics approached by the same people who I've also enjoyed discussing history, art, music, relationships, Flash animations, archaic slang, great sushi restauarants, and the like with.
The best quality of this site is its refusal to splinter into niche markets like the rest of the world. It's the last text-based web refuge for the curious generalist. This site could have easily multiplied its pages years ago, engendering SportsFilter, NewsFilter, CookFilter, RelationshipFilter, MusicFilter and so on, ad infinitum. We've all seen these flavors happen elsewhere. Matt's refusal to structure the site this way is what makes it a community. Hashing out the nature of what we do and don't want to see becomes the job of the entire community, which is why we're here in MeTa, which keeps the place on the rails.
With no news or politics, it would be poorer. And the News and Politics version would be poorer as well, since so many of us would not trouble ourselves to go there because of its monothematic nature, while we do occasionally get drawn into political threads here when they're active, compelling, unusual, brand new, or otherwise 'Best of'. And I think those threads become the better for the participation of people who do not identify primarily as newshounds.
posted by Miko at 2:08 PM on February 10, 2006
MetaFilter is loved by so many because it's a one-stop (mostly) intelligent discussion which can reach to cover just about all topics, current and historical. I would never bother to go to a NewsFilter site, because I come here for the discussion, not the news. I appreciate seeing news and political topics approached by the same people who I've also enjoyed discussing history, art, music, relationships, Flash animations, archaic slang, great sushi restauarants, and the like with.
The best quality of this site is its refusal to splinter into niche markets like the rest of the world. It's the last text-based web refuge for the curious generalist. This site could have easily multiplied its pages years ago, engendering SportsFilter, NewsFilter, CookFilter, RelationshipFilter, MusicFilter and so on, ad infinitum. We've all seen these flavors happen elsewhere. Matt's refusal to structure the site this way is what makes it a community. Hashing out the nature of what we do and don't want to see becomes the job of the entire community, which is why we're here in MeTa, which keeps the place on the rails.
With no news or politics, it would be poorer. And the News and Politics version would be poorer as well, since so many of us would not trouble ourselves to go there because of its monothematic nature, while we do occasionally get drawn into political threads here when they're active, compelling, unusual, brand new, or otherwise 'Best of'. And I think those threads become the better for the participation of people who do not identify primarily as newshounds.
posted by Miko at 2:08 PM on February 10, 2006
Are you serious?
posted by dios at 12:08 PM EST on February 10 [!]
Yes.
posted by juiceCake at 2:20 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by dios at 12:08 PM EST on February 10 [!]
Yes.
posted by juiceCake at 2:20 PM on February 10, 2006
Well said, Miko, you make a good point. I also love the broad range of topics, which is what first drew me here in the first place.
The problem is that we seem to be losing that broad range due to a disproportionate amount of (similar and redundant) political posts. Lately it seems like MeFi has become a political blog with a few links to some cool art thrown in every now and then.
posted by Gamblor at 2:24 PM on February 10, 2006
The problem is that we seem to be losing that broad range due to a disproportionate amount of (similar and redundant) political posts. Lately it seems like MeFi has become a political blog with a few links to some cool art thrown in every now and then.
posted by Gamblor at 2:24 PM on February 10, 2006
MeFi has become a political blog with a few links to some cool art thrown in every now and then.
I pissed Matt off a few weeks ago by suggesting that he had decided to let Metafilter become more of a political blog, "Daily Kos + Hasselhoff." Apparently I guessed wrong as to his intent. But that is the direction of the site.
posted by LarryC at 2:55 PM on February 10, 2006
I pissed Matt off a few weeks ago by suggesting that he had decided to let Metafilter become more of a political blog, "Daily Kos + Hasselhoff." Apparently I guessed wrong as to his intent. But that is the direction of the site.
posted by LarryC at 2:55 PM on February 10, 2006
I still think Matt's response to that was fairly significant.
posted by Gator at 3:01 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by Gator at 3:01 PM on February 10, 2006
I've been trying to axe more of them earlier, but usually I only do it if the flags point that way or if mathowie and I agree that it has to go.
Good point. I haven't been very diligent about flagging such posts in the past, and I'll try to do better in the future, and I encourage others to do the same. I've just gone through and flagged 12 of the 50 posts currently on the front page.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 3:34 PM on February 10, 2006
Good point. I haven't been very diligent about flagging such posts in the past, and I'll try to do better in the future, and I encourage others to do the same. I've just gone through and flagged 12 of the 50 posts currently on the front page.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 3:34 PM on February 10, 2006
But is newsfilter an acceptable (to Matt and Jess) reason for flagging?
posted by LarryC at 4:03 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by LarryC at 4:03 PM on February 10, 2006
I just flag 'em as noise.
posted by klangklangston at 4:10 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by klangklangston at 4:10 PM on February 10, 2006
Since they distract from my posts on pornography.
posted by klangklangston at 4:11 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by klangklangston at 4:11 PM on February 10, 2006
But is newsfilter an acceptable (to Matt and Jess) reason for flagging?
If it's not, they can ignore the flags. But jessamyn's statement seems to imply that it is.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 4:20 PM on February 10, 2006
If it's not, they can ignore the flags. But jessamyn's statement seems to imply that it is.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 4:20 PM on February 10, 2006
Wingefilter.
Slap Incognito has posted no links 28 comments to MetaFilter
and 3 threads and 11 comments to MetaTalk.
Exactly. The problem is people posting crap. Slap Incognito has not posted crap. That is a good thing.
Sure, us folks who aren't posting stellar stuff aren't doing the best thing. We aren't increasing the signal to noise ratio by adding quality links. But we're undeniably doing a better thing than people who are decreasing the signal to noise ratio by adding quality links.
For you folks who are into the politics thing, think of it this way: People get pissed off at corrupt politicians. These people are not doing the best thing (becoming good politicians themselves), but they're undeniably better than the people doing the bad things (the corrupt politicians), and I would hope that us likeminded non-fans-of-Bush wouldn't take the position that no-one should complain about Bush unless they are running for some office themselves.
But, if that is truly people's opinion, then perhaps I should take this tack:
If folks truly believe that no-one should be critical of noise on the front page unless they are generators of signal, then they should equally believe that no-one should be critical of noisy politicians (of any stripe) unless they are signally politicians, and thus a moratorium on polifilter (or criticism of pretty much anything) should be observed by all but the tiny handful of people who are criticising something that they are actively involved in doing better.
I, obviously, don't think that's practical or logical, but by the same token I don't think that you have to be an expert filmmaker to say that Uwe Boll movies aren't very good, that you have to be a chef to say that fried turd tastes bad, or that you have to be a master FPPer to point out that there are bad FPPs.
posted by Bugbread at 5:38 PM on February 10, 2006
Slap Incognito has posted no links 28 comments to MetaFilter
and 3 threads and 11 comments to MetaTalk.
Exactly. The problem is people posting crap. Slap Incognito has not posted crap. That is a good thing.
Sure, us folks who aren't posting stellar stuff aren't doing the best thing. We aren't increasing the signal to noise ratio by adding quality links. But we're undeniably doing a better thing than people who are decreasing the signal to noise ratio by adding quality links.
For you folks who are into the politics thing, think of it this way: People get pissed off at corrupt politicians. These people are not doing the best thing (becoming good politicians themselves), but they're undeniably better than the people doing the bad things (the corrupt politicians), and I would hope that us likeminded non-fans-of-Bush wouldn't take the position that no-one should complain about Bush unless they are running for some office themselves.
But, if that is truly people's opinion, then perhaps I should take this tack:
If folks truly believe that no-one should be critical of noise on the front page unless they are generators of signal, then they should equally believe that no-one should be critical of noisy politicians (of any stripe) unless they are signally politicians, and thus a moratorium on polifilter (or criticism of pretty much anything) should be observed by all but the tiny handful of people who are criticising something that they are actively involved in doing better.
I, obviously, don't think that's practical or logical, but by the same token I don't think that you have to be an expert filmmaker to say that Uwe Boll movies aren't very good, that you have to be a chef to say that fried turd tastes bad, or that you have to be a master FPPer to point out that there are bad FPPs.
posted by Bugbread at 5:38 PM on February 10, 2006
"there are no posting guidelines anymore" : I didn't say this was a bad thing. ;-P
posted by mischief at 5:42 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by mischief at 5:42 PM on February 10, 2006
But we're undeniably doing a better thing than people who are decreasing the signal to noise ratio by adding quality links.
That should have read:
But we're undeniably doing a better thing than people who are decreasing the signal to noise ratio by adding crappy links.
posted by Bugbread at 5:45 PM on February 10, 2006
That should have read:
But we're undeniably doing a better thing than people who are decreasing the signal to noise ratio by adding crappy links.
posted by Bugbread at 5:45 PM on February 10, 2006
Oh, and a mea culpa out front: I've only ever posted one FPP, and that was in a childish attempt to point out a perceived double-standard about which I was incorrect. So my total contribution to the front page has been 100% shit, and it's something I've apologized for before and will again. So, yes, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone".
posted by Bugbread at 5:48 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by Bugbread at 5:48 PM on February 10, 2006
Then change the name of the site. There is a percentage of users, amberglow, from what i've read, being one of them, who believe nothing should be deleted, that it's our job to skip what we don't like, that it's our job to filter.
Which is fine. But thank god matt disagrees (at least a tiny bit) or metafilter would go straight to hell.
but--It IS our job to filter, idiot! We're the members and we create the content--WE'RE the ones that create the front page, and all pages. We pick and choose what we want to post. It's really not brain surgery or hard to understand. If you don't see what you like, either skip it or post something yourself--model good behavior instead of trashing others, why don't you?
posted by amberglow at 7:44 PM on February 10, 2006
Which is fine. But thank god matt disagrees (at least a tiny bit) or metafilter would go straight to hell.
but--It IS our job to filter, idiot! We're the members and we create the content--WE'RE the ones that create the front page, and all pages. We pick and choose what we want to post. It's really not brain surgery or hard to understand. If you don't see what you like, either skip it or post something yourself--model good behavior instead of trashing others, why don't you?
posted by amberglow at 7:44 PM on February 10, 2006
you want daddy Matt and mommy Jess to come in all the time and clean up what you consider messes?
Too damn bad--grow up and take responsibility in making the front page what you want it to be by posting the kinds of things you want to see.
posted by amberglow at 7:46 PM on February 10, 2006
Too damn bad--grow up and take responsibility in making the front page what you want it to be by posting the kinds of things you want to see.
posted by amberglow at 7:46 PM on February 10, 2006
or just keep whining and insulting others--your choice.
posted by amberglow at 7:48 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by amberglow at 7:48 PM on February 10, 2006
you want daddy Matt and mommy Jess to come in all the time and clean up what you consider messes?
Well, technically, only Matt or Jess can "clean up" the mess, as only they can delete stuff. But I think the general idea is not for mommy and daddy to clean up the mess, but to stop siblings from making the mess in the first place. Lacking that, for mommy and daddy to clean up the mess, and give siblings making the mess a warning not to keep making messes.
That said, I would like to make the front page a crap-free zone, and am taking responsibility in making the front page what I want it to be by not posting crap (with the regretted exception of the crap post I made).
posted by Bugbread at 8:50 PM on February 10, 2006
Well, technically, only Matt or Jess can "clean up" the mess, as only they can delete stuff. But I think the general idea is not for mommy and daddy to clean up the mess, but to stop siblings from making the mess in the first place. Lacking that, for mommy and daddy to clean up the mess, and give siblings making the mess a warning not to keep making messes.
That said, I would like to make the front page a crap-free zone, and am taking responsibility in making the front page what I want it to be by not posting crap (with the regretted exception of the crap post I made).
posted by Bugbread at 8:50 PM on February 10, 2006
But I think the general idea is not for mommy and daddy to clean up the mess, but to stop siblings from making the mess in the first place.
Whoops, unclear sentence. I meant "I think the general idea is not for mommy and daddy to clean up the mess, but for us to stop our own siblings from making the mess in the first place."
posted by Bugbread at 9:11 PM on February 10, 2006
Whoops, unclear sentence. I meant "I think the general idea is not for mommy and daddy to clean up the mess, but for us to stop our own siblings from making the mess in the first place."
posted by Bugbread at 9:11 PM on February 10, 2006
whining and insulting others
Ummm, Amber? That would be you right now. Calm down. And before you call anyone childish, you might want to find the shift key.
posted by LarryC at 9:11 PM on February 10, 2006
Ummm, Amber? That would be you right now. Calm down. And before you call anyone childish, you might want to find the shift key.
posted by LarryC at 9:11 PM on February 10, 2006
or just keep whining and insulting others--your choice.
Amberglow, what exactly is your problem? I didn't insult you. I disagree with how you think the site should be run. How is that insulting you? I simply disagree with you.
You've insulted me here, in other threads, on other websites. I couldn't care less. Whatever floats your boat. But quit being such a freaking hypocrite. I don't call people fuckers, or idiots, or stupid, or threaten them. That's you, not me.
you want daddy Matt and mommy Jess to come in all the time and clean up what you consider messes?
No. I'd like members to bring good food to your "potluck supper". Stop the messes to begin with and there's less to clean up. Act like adults and mommy and daddy will have less to do. More filtering means mommy and daddy doesn't even get involved. Basically, the complete opposite of what you claim I want.
It IS our job to filter, idiot.
You simply don't understand how it works, do you. Or do you not care to understand because it doesn't jive with your idea of metafilter?
You're right. WE are the filter. BEFORE we post. That's the name of the site. MetaFILTER. It's not metapostandyoufilter.com. Members filter from the web the best links and post them. What part of that do you not understand? The site IS the filter because the members posting are filtering the web (in concept). That's where the filter part comes in. Then the user chooses what interests him/her.
No, it's not brain surgery, but you seem to have a difficult time grasping this simple concept.
posted by justgary at 9:33 PM on February 10, 2006
Amberglow, what exactly is your problem? I didn't insult you. I disagree with how you think the site should be run. How is that insulting you? I simply disagree with you.
You've insulted me here, in other threads, on other websites. I couldn't care less. Whatever floats your boat. But quit being such a freaking hypocrite. I don't call people fuckers, or idiots, or stupid, or threaten them. That's you, not me.
you want daddy Matt and mommy Jess to come in all the time and clean up what you consider messes?
No. I'd like members to bring good food to your "potluck supper". Stop the messes to begin with and there's less to clean up. Act like adults and mommy and daddy will have less to do. More filtering means mommy and daddy doesn't even get involved. Basically, the complete opposite of what you claim I want.
It IS our job to filter, idiot.
You simply don't understand how it works, do you. Or do you not care to understand because it doesn't jive with your idea of metafilter?
You're right. WE are the filter. BEFORE we post. That's the name of the site. MetaFILTER. It's not metapostandyoufilter.com. Members filter from the web the best links and post them. What part of that do you not understand? The site IS the filter because the members posting are filtering the web (in concept). That's where the filter part comes in. Then the user chooses what interests him/her.
No, it's not brain surgery, but you seem to have a difficult time grasping this simple concept.
posted by justgary at 9:33 PM on February 10, 2006
just because you don't think others are filtering (because they filter differently than you) doesn't mean they're actually not filtering--that's what you don't seem to get.
just because you don't think it's good food doesn't mean it's not good food. it's not your site--it's ours. and the quality of the food depends on all of us contributing--it's simple.
i've grasped it from the beginning, which is why i'm not always whining like you. I bet your whining makes up the majority of your contributions here--is that good food?
posted by amberglow at 9:46 PM on February 10, 2006
just because you don't think it's good food doesn't mean it's not good food. it's not your site--it's ours. and the quality of the food depends on all of us contributing--it's simple.
i've grasped it from the beginning, which is why i'm not always whining like you. I bet your whining makes up the majority of your contributions here--is that good food?
posted by amberglow at 9:46 PM on February 10, 2006
Justgary, to be fair, there's filtering on both ends: MeFites are supposed to filter "the best of the web", and individual readers are supposed to filter "the parts of the best of the web that I am personally interested in". You can't expect every post to be something that you personally like, and, by the same token, you can't expect the onus of filtering to be entirely on yourself, where "MetaFilter" starts meaning "MetaRandomAggregatorForIndividualFiltering".
The ideal, I guess, is that state you get in (or, at least, I get in), where you look at a link, have absolutely no interest in it, and yet feel that it really is the best of the web. It works the same way with food for me: there are some dishes which I hate and think are horrible, and there are some dishes which I hate but think are really good, just not for my palate.
posted by Bugbread at 9:51 PM on February 10, 2006
The ideal, I guess, is that state you get in (or, at least, I get in), where you look at a link, have absolutely no interest in it, and yet feel that it really is the best of the web. It works the same way with food for me: there are some dishes which I hate and think are horrible, and there are some dishes which I hate but think are really good, just not for my palate.
posted by Bugbread at 9:51 PM on February 10, 2006
I bet your whining makes up the majority of your contributions here--is that good food?
Yep, check out all the metatalk threads I've started. Lots of complaining (besides, you whine every single day about the same subject, far more than I whine about anything). Metafilter isn't my main interest and I'm not online enough to find links before one of the 30,000 on metafilter find them. But I rank pretty low when it comes to adding noise. Not everyone has 13 interesting comments to add every single day.
MeFites are supposed to filter "the best of the web", and individual readers are supposed to filter "the parts of the best of the web that I am personally interested in".
I don't disagree at all. But this attitude:
just because you don't think it's good food doesn't mean it's not good food.
...gives license to anything and everything, because 'someone' thought it was good. Of course, that's not true. If it were, matt would never delete anything except doubles and there would be no flagging of posts.
posted by justgary at 10:19 PM on February 10, 2006
Yep, check out all the metatalk threads I've started. Lots of complaining (besides, you whine every single day about the same subject, far more than I whine about anything). Metafilter isn't my main interest and I'm not online enough to find links before one of the 30,000 on metafilter find them. But I rank pretty low when it comes to adding noise. Not everyone has 13 interesting comments to add every single day.
MeFites are supposed to filter "the best of the web", and individual readers are supposed to filter "the parts of the best of the web that I am personally interested in".
I don't disagree at all. But this attitude:
just because you don't think it's good food doesn't mean it's not good food.
...gives license to anything and everything, because 'someone' thought it was good. Of course, that's not true. If it were, matt would never delete anything except doubles and there would be no flagging of posts.
posted by justgary at 10:19 PM on February 10, 2006
Where did shrill amberglow come from? I remember a different amberglow, the kind that posted cool stuff like this. Lately it's all politics, though, which I think is kind of sad. Anyway.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 10:19 PM on February 10, 2006
posted by monju_bosatsu at 10:19 PM on February 10, 2006
Speak your mind as long as it makes people comfortable.
posted by sgt.serenity at 3:15 AM on February 11, 2006
posted by sgt.serenity at 3:15 AM on February 11, 2006
... round and round and round and round ...
posted by crunchland at 4:29 AM on February 11, 2006
posted by crunchland at 4:29 AM on February 11, 2006
> Where did shrill amberglow come from?
Yeah. Jeez, Amber. If you're sleep-deprived or something it's Saturday, you could sleep in.
posted by jfuller at 5:23 AM on February 11, 2006
Yeah. Jeez, Amber. If you're sleep-deprived or something it's Saturday, you could sleep in.
posted by jfuller at 5:23 AM on February 11, 2006
Eideteker writes "I never understand this line of thinking. How is more content a cure for bad content?"
justgary writes "If a lot of crappy cooks put their dishes on the table, and you don't have time to find what is actually edible, then you're out of luck. Bringing your own dish solves nothing."
It seems to follow the "if you feel there's a lack of good content on the front page contribute something you think is good" idea.
posted by clevershark at 8:03 AM on February 11, 2006
justgary writes "If a lot of crappy cooks put their dishes on the table, and you don't have time to find what is actually edible, then you're out of luck. Bringing your own dish solves nothing."
It seems to follow the "if you feel there's a lack of good content on the front page contribute something you think is good" idea.
posted by clevershark at 8:03 AM on February 11, 2006
One of the most important ways that contributing helps is by setting norms. If you can make a good post, it shows others where the bar is set at.
And one of the reasons why politics continues to dominate is both that it's the norm to have it posted, and there's a nearly endless supply of it. There are thousands of actors independently generating more political news and making sure that it gets through the gatekeepers at the media. Not so much true with good art or culture. So politics will always be an easier thing to post, and you'll always see a disproportionate amount without a concerted effort to change that. Combine that with a vocal minority who prefers those posts, and you have a pretty good structural explanation for the prevalence of the posts. (And the fact that Bush is in charge does tend to make the posts more alarmist and shrill, if not more prevalent and critical.)
posted by klangklangston at 9:04 AM on February 11, 2006
And one of the reasons why politics continues to dominate is both that it's the norm to have it posted, and there's a nearly endless supply of it. There are thousands of actors independently generating more political news and making sure that it gets through the gatekeepers at the media. Not so much true with good art or culture. So politics will always be an easier thing to post, and you'll always see a disproportionate amount without a concerted effort to change that. Combine that with a vocal minority who prefers those posts, and you have a pretty good structural explanation for the prevalence of the posts. (And the fact that Bush is in charge does tend to make the posts more alarmist and shrill, if not more prevalent and critical.)
posted by klangklangston at 9:04 AM on February 11, 2006
"If you can make a good post, it shows others where the bar is set at."
No, not really.
posted by mischief at 9:25 AM on February 11, 2006
No, not really.
posted by mischief at 9:25 AM on February 11, 2006
Wheres the Quonsar that used to turn up on mefi and discuss jean paul sartre and existentialism ?
I sure miss that guy .
posted by sgt.serenity at 10:31 AM on February 11, 2006
I sure miss that guy .
posted by sgt.serenity at 10:31 AM on February 11, 2006
"just because you don't think others are filtering (because they filter differently than you) doesn't mean they're actually not filtering--that's what you don't seem to get.
just because you don't think it's good food doesn't mean it's not good food. it's not your site--it's ours. and the quality of the food depends on all of us contributing--it's simple."
Jeez, amberglow.
What this is really like is an ongoing, voluntary potluck dinner where there's criteria for the food you're supposed to bring—it's good, it's unusual, it's stuff we haven't tried before.
However, you and some others are bringing ten pounds of tuna salad every day. And you say, "well, I think that tuna salad is 'good', and it's healthy—I think it's what we should eat. If you don't like it, then bring something else. We'll keep bringing tuna salad."
So the place reeks of tuna and even more people are bringing tuna salad because they think this is a fucking tuna sald potluck dinner. If anyone says, "hey, this isn't really supposed to be a tuna salad potluck", those people say, "says you. I like tuna salad and it's what I came here to eat. You don't have to eat it. If you like other stuff, bring it yourself."
A lot of people like tuna salad, a lot of people like Celine Dion, and a lot of people watch Fox News. But this isn't a school cafeteria, or a top-40 radio station, or a partisan TV news channel. Quit insisting that it is.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 2:02 PM on February 11, 2006
just because you don't think it's good food doesn't mean it's not good food. it's not your site--it's ours. and the quality of the food depends on all of us contributing--it's simple."
Jeez, amberglow.
What this is really like is an ongoing, voluntary potluck dinner where there's criteria for the food you're supposed to bring—it's good, it's unusual, it's stuff we haven't tried before.
However, you and some others are bringing ten pounds of tuna salad every day. And you say, "well, I think that tuna salad is 'good', and it's healthy—I think it's what we should eat. If you don't like it, then bring something else. We'll keep bringing tuna salad."
So the place reeks of tuna and even more people are bringing tuna salad because they think this is a fucking tuna sald potluck dinner. If anyone says, "hey, this isn't really supposed to be a tuna salad potluck", those people say, "says you. I like tuna salad and it's what I came here to eat. You don't have to eat it. If you like other stuff, bring it yourself."
A lot of people like tuna salad, a lot of people like Celine Dion, and a lot of people watch Fox News. But this isn't a school cafeteria, or a top-40 radio station, or a partisan TV news channel. Quit insisting that it is.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 2:02 PM on February 11, 2006
What EB said.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 2:22 PM on February 11, 2006
posted by monju_bosatsu at 2:22 PM on February 11, 2006
A lot of people like tuna salad, a lot of people like Celine Dion, and a lot of people watch Fox News. But this isn't a school cafeteria, or a top-40 radio station, or a partisan TV news channel. Quit insisting that it is.
Nope--it's a large, diverse community, of people with very different interests and outlooks, 30k strong and growing. It's not some small corner of the web anymore--it's become more mainstream with the growing mainstreaming of the web. If you don't like that, or tuna salad, do something about it by bringing your own dishes. That's the only response possible, because the more news and political posts there are on the front page, the more there'll continue to be--it's a self-perpetuating thing.
You don't like tuna salad--well, thousands of people do. Bring your hummus and your chocolate-covered ants and your poutine, and people will see that those things are cool too. There have always been cool, interesting things posted, and there continue to be--even today. I could list a dozen cool non-news posts on the front page--i don't know why you guys haven't commented in them.
posted by amberglow at 2:33 PM on February 11, 2006
Nope--it's a large, diverse community, of people with very different interests and outlooks, 30k strong and growing. It's not some small corner of the web anymore--it's become more mainstream with the growing mainstreaming of the web. If you don't like that, or tuna salad, do something about it by bringing your own dishes. That's the only response possible, because the more news and political posts there are on the front page, the more there'll continue to be--it's a self-perpetuating thing.
You don't like tuna salad--well, thousands of people do. Bring your hummus and your chocolate-covered ants and your poutine, and people will see that those things are cool too. There have always been cool, interesting things posted, and there continue to be--even today. I could list a dozen cool non-news posts on the front page--i don't know why you guys haven't commented in them.
posted by amberglow at 2:33 PM on February 11, 2006
"You don't like tuna salad--well, thousands of people do."
Argumentum ad populum.
Or, in the parlance of the internet, thousands of people liked Hitler.
posted by klangklangston at 2:42 PM on February 11, 2006
Argumentum ad populum.
Or, in the parlance of the internet, thousands of people liked Hitler.
posted by klangklangston at 2:42 PM on February 11, 2006
do something about it by bringing your own dishes. That's the only response possible
Perhaps not.
posted by event at 2:51 PM on February 11, 2006
Perhaps not.
posted by event at 2:51 PM on February 11, 2006
Not only that, but here's my final answer to amberglow: you're on MetaChat. There's nothing in the guidelines over that prevents news and political posting. So why don't you post news and politics there every day? Do you think that would be appropriate? If you and some others started posting news and politics to mecha everyday, and more people came to mecha to read news and politics posts, would your respone to anyone who complained be "post other stuff you like, you don't have to read the politics"?
You're hijacking the site and using an appeal to a majority to justify doing so. But there is no question that this is not a news and politics site. None. It increasingly looks that way, but you can't redefine what this site is anymore than you can turn MetaChat into a tv-show fanboy site.
MetaFilter is not a community site which creates its one mandate. Its mandate was set by the site's owner at creation, and it hasn't been changed. Matt allows news and political stories, but he's not thrilled with them and he's said that cracking down on them causes to many headaches for him with regard to complaints. In a sense, that's a use of force to overpower the owner of the site and impose your own mandate. It's arrogant.
And though you pretend that this is a community site that decides its mandate through consensus, you and the other newsfilterista have not solicitated the entire community's preferences before insisting that you know what the majority wants and giving us what you think we need. That's not a communal mandate, it's an imposition of your will onto the entire community, and it's forceful and anti-communal.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 3:06 PM on February 11, 2006
You're hijacking the site and using an appeal to a majority to justify doing so. But there is no question that this is not a news and politics site. None. It increasingly looks that way, but you can't redefine what this site is anymore than you can turn MetaChat into a tv-show fanboy site.
MetaFilter is not a community site which creates its one mandate. Its mandate was set by the site's owner at creation, and it hasn't been changed. Matt allows news and political stories, but he's not thrilled with them and he's said that cracking down on them causes to many headaches for him with regard to complaints. In a sense, that's a use of force to overpower the owner of the site and impose your own mandate. It's arrogant.
And though you pretend that this is a community site that decides its mandate through consensus, you and the other newsfilterista have not solicitated the entire community's preferences before insisting that you know what the majority wants and giving us what you think we need. That's not a communal mandate, it's an imposition of your will onto the entire community, and it's forceful and anti-communal.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 3:06 PM on February 11, 2006
The "problem," to the extent you think there is a problem, arises from MetaFilter's design. First, MetaFilter is uniquely democratic in that any member can publish a post on basically anything he or she wants. While there are certain procedural limits, restricting double posts and self links, there is no restriction on subject matter, and posts are not reviewed by a moderator prior to publication. The balance of subjects covered on the front page, then, will obviously change with the changing and growing membership. Moreover, we can probably expect--as EB explicitly points out and amberglow implicitly recognizes--that new members' conception of MetaFilter's purpose will color the content of the posts from them. That can cause a snowball effect which culminates in new members who--mistakenly, in my view--believe that a single link to the latest NYTimes or WashPo editorial on the NSA spying scandal is not just permissible, but what MetaFilter is all about.
Second, MetaFilter is not designed to accommodate continuing discussion on developing news stories. Initial posts on political or news stories, like the NSA scandal, scroll off the front page pretty quickly, and updates get posted to the front page, instead of in the existing threads. Amberglow has actually been pretty good on this front, posting lots of new information to the bottom of threads as stories develop. He's just about the only one that does this, though, and I wonder how many people really monitor those old threads.
The first aspect of MetaFilter's design, the open posting model, is a good aspect, and should not be changed. I don't want posts restricted to certain topics or pre-screened. The second aspect, however, could use some work. After some thought, I've concluded that we need to clarify our understanding of what constitutes a double post in the context of political and news stories. I suggest that if the subject matter of the post has been the focus of a recent post, the new post is a double, even if the link is a new development or an update. Instead of flagging these posts as "noise" or "breaks the guidelines," we should flag them as double posts. New links on existing stories should be posted in the existing threads.
This arguably requires more work from mathowie and jessamyn, but I don't think much more. When there's a post on the NSA scandal, for example, and it gets flagged as a double, it gets deleted like any other double. If a story is big enough to continue to develop, a link should go in the sidebar.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 3:18 PM on February 11, 2006
Second, MetaFilter is not designed to accommodate continuing discussion on developing news stories. Initial posts on political or news stories, like the NSA scandal, scroll off the front page pretty quickly, and updates get posted to the front page, instead of in the existing threads. Amberglow has actually been pretty good on this front, posting lots of new information to the bottom of threads as stories develop. He's just about the only one that does this, though, and I wonder how many people really monitor those old threads.
The first aspect of MetaFilter's design, the open posting model, is a good aspect, and should not be changed. I don't want posts restricted to certain topics or pre-screened. The second aspect, however, could use some work. After some thought, I've concluded that we need to clarify our understanding of what constitutes a double post in the context of political and news stories. I suggest that if the subject matter of the post has been the focus of a recent post, the new post is a double, even if the link is a new development or an update. Instead of flagging these posts as "noise" or "breaks the guidelines," we should flag them as double posts. New links on existing stories should be posted in the existing threads.
This arguably requires more work from mathowie and jessamyn, but I don't think much more. When there's a post on the NSA scandal, for example, and it gets flagged as a double, it gets deleted like any other double. If a story is big enough to continue to develop, a link should go in the sidebar.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 3:18 PM on February 11, 2006
I'm not hijacking anything, and go insult someone else.
Again, how about not insulting others, and modeling the behavior you'd rather see? It's much easier, and not as assholish, by far.
I don't pretend anything--i see a site where many people like to post about news and politics and art and apple and foolishness and writers and so on...
It's you and your whiny friends who don't see Mefi for what it is, and your persistance in running to daddy to fix it so you'll like it better is pathetic--it's you who keep wanting to impose your will on all of us, and it's failed before and it'll fail again. We--the community--create all the content on the site--not daddy.
posted by amberglow at 3:21 PM on February 11, 2006
Again, how about not insulting others, and modeling the behavior you'd rather see? It's much easier, and not as assholish, by far.
I don't pretend anything--i see a site where many people like to post about news and politics and art and apple and foolishness and writers and so on...
It's you and your whiny friends who don't see Mefi for what it is, and your persistance in running to daddy to fix it so you'll like it better is pathetic--it's you who keep wanting to impose your will on all of us, and it's failed before and it'll fail again. We--the community--create all the content on the site--not daddy.
posted by amberglow at 3:21 PM on February 11, 2006
EB: you can claim all you want what MeFi should be, but that doesn't change what we see daily. After all, the original poster's complaint concerned MF's one-dish buffet.
posted by mischief at 3:23 PM on February 11, 2006
posted by mischief at 3:23 PM on February 11, 2006
Moreover, we can probably expect--as EB explicitly points out and amberglow implicitly recognizes--that new members' conception of MetaFilter's purpose will color the content of the posts from them. That can cause a snowball effect which culminates in new members who--mistakenly, in my view--believe that a single link to the latest NYTimes or WashPo editorial on the NSA spying scandal is not just permissible, but what MetaFilter is all about.
The only effective way to change that is to post more of what you want to see on the front page---it won't happen from more moderation, and that's exactly the opposite of how a site where the content is created by the community should act.
posted by amberglow at 3:24 PM on February 11, 2006
The only effective way to change that is to post more of what you want to see on the front page---it won't happen from more moderation, and that's exactly the opposite of how a site where the content is created by the community should act.
posted by amberglow at 3:24 PM on February 11, 2006
I, for one, love tuna salad. And I like to read newsfilter as well. I do think that the news and politics could easily be cut by a factor of five or ten, and I would still get my fill. Monju has the right idea in that many threads can be extended rather than posting a new thread on the same topic. Most newsfilter threads take little effort to find the story, so it comes down to a matter of vanity with people just wanting to see their name on the front page. Which, with the quantity of newsfilter posts that there are, doesn't stay there very long anyway, creating a vicious cycle.
posted by Roger Dodger at 3:26 PM on February 11, 2006
posted by Roger Dodger at 3:26 PM on February 11, 2006
The only effective way to change that is to post more of what you want to see on the front page---it won't happen from more moderation, and that's exactly the opposite of how a site where the content is created by the community should act.
Well, that's not the only effective way; deleting political and news posts would be just as, if not more effective. However, I agree that flat out deletion of those kinds of posts--at least of the good ones--is antithetical to the notion that MetaFilter is a community site. Moreover, it's clear that Matt doesn't want to engage in that kind of heavy-handed moderation, so now matter how effective it might be, it's not going to happen.
I think treating updates and new developments as double posts, however, is a reasonable compromise. There's no reason that the NSA spying scandal or the Abramhoff scandal should be entitled to more space on the front page than any other post, but that's the way it works right now. Every update gets posted to the front page, despite its relation to the big story that's been posted on a number of times previously. I don't think that political posts should be deleted outright, but I do think Matt and Jess should do a better job of confining stories with ongoing developments to a single thread. Maybe Matt should even bring on another moderator to handle politics and news.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 3:32 PM on February 11, 2006
Well, that's not the only effective way; deleting political and news posts would be just as, if not more effective. However, I agree that flat out deletion of those kinds of posts--at least of the good ones--is antithetical to the notion that MetaFilter is a community site. Moreover, it's clear that Matt doesn't want to engage in that kind of heavy-handed moderation, so now matter how effective it might be, it's not going to happen.
I think treating updates and new developments as double posts, however, is a reasonable compromise. There's no reason that the NSA spying scandal or the Abramhoff scandal should be entitled to more space on the front page than any other post, but that's the way it works right now. Every update gets posted to the front page, despite its relation to the big story that's been posted on a number of times previously. I don't think that political posts should be deleted outright, but I do think Matt and Jess should do a better job of confining stories with ongoing developments to a single thread. Maybe Matt should even bring on another moderator to handle politics and news.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 3:32 PM on February 11, 2006
Let me clarify: I don't think my proposed solution is necessarily the best solution. I think it would be much easier to create news.metafilter.com and let people post all the Iraq-NSA-Abramhoff-SCOTUS-etc. posts there. People who want political discussion can get plenty, and people who don't can avoid it easily enough. Matt doesn't seem willing to do that, though.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 3:37 PM on February 11, 2006
posted by monju_bosatsu at 3:37 PM on February 11, 2006
"I'm not hijacking anything, and go insult someone else.
Again, how about not insulting others, and modeling the behavior you'd rather see? It's much easier, and not as assholish, by far."
I am modeling the behavior that I'd rather see. Compare my comment to yours.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 4:06 PM on February 11, 2006
Again, how about not insulting others, and modeling the behavior you'd rather see? It's much easier, and not as assholish, by far."
I am modeling the behavior that I'd rather see. Compare my comment to yours.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 4:06 PM on February 11, 2006
Here's the real solution, guys... First, switch your default view of the front page to "Recent Comments." Then, avoid posting to political threads you find distasteful -- if no one comments to them, they will fall off the front page like a stone. Next, post something better, so that everyone else should see what a good front page post ought to be like.
Finally, if the political posts continue to clutter your front page, and you just can't stand it anymore, you probably ought to find another community, because you're in the minority.
I counted up all the comments to all the threads from the 9th -- the day that this whole thread was complaining about. Nearly 50% of the comments posted to the threads started that day were in the political threads, even though they only account for about a quarter of all the threads posted that day. Clearly, there's a huge portion of the population of Metafilter that likes the news/political threads, even though some of us may not.
So I say again (and again) post stuff about which you do like, and avoid the threads you don't like.
(And stop picking on Amberglow.)
posted by crunchland at 4:09 PM on February 11, 2006
Finally, if the political posts continue to clutter your front page, and you just can't stand it anymore, you probably ought to find another community, because you're in the minority.
I counted up all the comments to all the threads from the 9th -- the day that this whole thread was complaining about. Nearly 50% of the comments posted to the threads started that day were in the political threads, even though they only account for about a quarter of all the threads posted that day. Clearly, there's a huge portion of the population of Metafilter that likes the news/political threads, even though some of us may not.
So I say again (and again) post stuff about which you do like, and avoid the threads you don't like.
(And stop picking on Amberglow.)
posted by crunchland at 4:09 PM on February 11, 2006
Nobody's picking on amberglow. If anything, amberglow's picking on Metafilter by responding to measured (and correct, in my humble) arguments with handbag swinging and epithets.
Also -- and it surprises me mildly to hear crunchland say it, given that although he's an abrasive bastard most of the time, I think he's no fool -- it's wrongheaded to appeal to a comment count to judge what people 'like'. This has always been pretty clear, I'd thought.
People like to argue. Arguments make for long threads. It doesn't matter if it's about SUVs, fat people, God, or the most recent political turd floating downstream, it's chum in the water.
There are more of the political turds, is all. That makes it seem everfresh, like a whole new argument, rather than a rehash of 'haha fatties are weaklings' or whatever.
And it seems pretty clear that people are going to keep posting them up on Metafilter.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:25 PM on February 11, 2006
Also -- and it surprises me mildly to hear crunchland say it, given that although he's an abrasive bastard most of the time, I think he's no fool -- it's wrongheaded to appeal to a comment count to judge what people 'like'. This has always been pretty clear, I'd thought.
People like to argue. Arguments make for long threads. It doesn't matter if it's about SUVs, fat people, God, or the most recent political turd floating downstream, it's chum in the water.
There are more of the political turds, is all. That makes it seem everfresh, like a whole new argument, rather than a rehash of 'haha fatties are weaklings' or whatever.
And it seems pretty clear that people are going to keep posting them up on Metafilter.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:25 PM on February 11, 2006
Disclaimer: I don't really mind a bit of newsfilter mixed in with the other stuff. When it doesn't devolve into shitslinging, it can quite edifying (as in the recent threads about Canadian politics and the election there).
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:27 PM on February 11, 2006
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:27 PM on February 11, 2006
It's been said over and over again that the number of comments is a very poor endorsement of a post.
I think what had always rubbed me the wrong way, in many cases like this one over many years, is the inevitability that there always has been and always will be that minority of a community who are propietary about something that simply isn't theirs. They use the word "we" without qualification, appealing to a majority that only exists with certainty in their own minds, they confuse their interests with the interests of the community, they think they're the "real" community and everyone else are visitors. They don't like their goals or methods questioned—it's the "way that it is". "If you don't like it, go somewhere else."
It is an absurdity to say "make more 'best of the web' posts". It's absurd because it wrongly assumes that there is not, effectively, a scarcity of resources. But there is: if there were 1000 newsfilter posts a day, the answer wouldn't be to post 1000 non-newsfilter posts a day. When one topic dominates a forum that has far more activity than anyone can keep up with in one day, that one topic is certainly crowding out other worthy topics, if for no other reason than that they are lost in the crowd and very difficult to locate. It's also an absurdity because "news and political" stories are ubiquitous and there's a never-ending supply, while, by its very nature, "best of the web", is rare. There couldn't possibly be as much "best of the web" to post as there is news.
Furthermore, quantity isn't quality. I don't want to see a MetaFilter with 60 very mediocre non-news posts a day, either. There is no particular vice in not frequently posting to MetaFilter's front page—indeed, the instinctive reluctance to post anything less than the best is the optimum attitude, while "it's interesting to me" is the worst. The former creates few FPPs. The latter creates many. It's perverse to assert, effectively, that to see a less newsfilter-y MeFi it's necessary for more people to post mediocre ephemera.
I'm not "picking on" amberglow, I'm answering his argument and his claim that I "just don't 'get it'". I'm sick of the strong overpowering the weak and the many herding the few. I'm sick of the death from a thousand little cuts. I miss being excited to see the day's MetaFilter page; and I'm sick of the same, old arguments in the political threads. I'm sick of posts that stroke us and remind us of our supposed great political fairness and wisdom and just how much the other guy really sucks. I'm sick of people assuming that I can't, or don't, read the damn newspaper.
But, hey, it's just a damn website.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 4:48 PM on February 11, 2006
I think what had always rubbed me the wrong way, in many cases like this one over many years, is the inevitability that there always has been and always will be that minority of a community who are propietary about something that simply isn't theirs. They use the word "we" without qualification, appealing to a majority that only exists with certainty in their own minds, they confuse their interests with the interests of the community, they think they're the "real" community and everyone else are visitors. They don't like their goals or methods questioned—it's the "way that it is". "If you don't like it, go somewhere else."
It is an absurdity to say "make more 'best of the web' posts". It's absurd because it wrongly assumes that there is not, effectively, a scarcity of resources. But there is: if there were 1000 newsfilter posts a day, the answer wouldn't be to post 1000 non-newsfilter posts a day. When one topic dominates a forum that has far more activity than anyone can keep up with in one day, that one topic is certainly crowding out other worthy topics, if for no other reason than that they are lost in the crowd and very difficult to locate. It's also an absurdity because "news and political" stories are ubiquitous and there's a never-ending supply, while, by its very nature, "best of the web", is rare. There couldn't possibly be as much "best of the web" to post as there is news.
Furthermore, quantity isn't quality. I don't want to see a MetaFilter with 60 very mediocre non-news posts a day, either. There is no particular vice in not frequently posting to MetaFilter's front page—indeed, the instinctive reluctance to post anything less than the best is the optimum attitude, while "it's interesting to me" is the worst. The former creates few FPPs. The latter creates many. It's perverse to assert, effectively, that to see a less newsfilter-y MeFi it's necessary for more people to post mediocre ephemera.
I'm not "picking on" amberglow, I'm answering his argument and his claim that I "just don't 'get it'". I'm sick of the strong overpowering the weak and the many herding the few. I'm sick of the death from a thousand little cuts. I miss being excited to see the day's MetaFilter page; and I'm sick of the same, old arguments in the political threads. I'm sick of posts that stroke us and remind us of our supposed great political fairness and wisdom and just how much the other guy really sucks. I'm sick of people assuming that I can't, or don't, read the damn newspaper.
But, hey, it's just a damn website.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 4:48 PM on February 11, 2006
I didn't mean to imply that the number of comments indicated anything other than activity, and based on the counts I made, the political threads garner more activity than anything else. While it's possible that the numbers are skewed by a couple people posting over and over in those threads, the stats show that they are responsibble for more activity than the other threads, and that has to count for something.
posted by crunchland at 5:09 PM on February 11, 2006
posted by crunchland at 5:09 PM on February 11, 2006
While it's possible that the numbers are skewed by a couple people posting over and over in those threads, the stats show that they are responsibble for more activity than the other threads, and that has to count for something.
It's not merely possible that the numbers are skewed by a small minority of vocal users, it's almost certain. In any case, though, the number of comments is only indicative of the amount of discussion, not activity per se. The relevant activity, to the extent user activity is relevant to this discussion, is the clickthrough rate on links in posts. Only Matt could tell us that.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 5:11 PM on February 11, 2006
It's not merely possible that the numbers are skewed by a small minority of vocal users, it's almost certain. In any case, though, the number of comments is only indicative of the amount of discussion, not activity per se. The relevant activity, to the extent user activity is relevant to this discussion, is the clickthrough rate on links in posts. Only Matt could tell us that.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 5:11 PM on February 11, 2006
The only effective way to change that is to post more of what you want to see on the front page---it won't happen from more moderation, and that's exactly the opposite of how a site where the content is created by the community should act.
Well, there are two types of moderation being called for: Mattmoderation and Selfmoderation. I can understand the desire to avoid putting the onus on Matt to delete stuff (though, to be fair, since it's apparently his primary revenue source, I don't feel nearly as hesitant about it as I used to), but do you also think MeFi's self-policing is also "exactly the opposite of how a site where the content is created by the community should act"? Because that's the type of moderation most (not all, but most) people here seem to be asking for.
posted by Bugbread at 5:48 PM on February 11, 2006
Well, there are two types of moderation being called for: Mattmoderation and Selfmoderation. I can understand the desire to avoid putting the onus on Matt to delete stuff (though, to be fair, since it's apparently his primary revenue source, I don't feel nearly as hesitant about it as I used to), but do you also think MeFi's self-policing is also "exactly the opposite of how a site where the content is created by the community should act"? Because that's the type of moderation most (not all, but most) people here seem to be asking for.
posted by Bugbread at 5:48 PM on February 11, 2006
Mattselferation.
posted by sonofsamiam at 6:36 PM on February 11, 2006
posted by sonofsamiam at 6:36 PM on February 11, 2006
not having read most of the upthread discussion, all I have to say is that if you don't like the FPP, make a better FPP.
Or, leave.
Or, make your own damn *filter, and delete other peoples posts that you think suck. Otherwise, stop griping.
Let the courage of your convictions be proof of their validity.
posted by Freen at 2:05 AM on February 12, 2006
Or, leave.
Or, make your own damn *filter, and delete other peoples posts that you think suck. Otherwise, stop griping.
Let the courage of your convictions be proof of their validity.
posted by Freen at 2:05 AM on February 12, 2006
None of those solutions cause the bad FPP to cease to be on Mefi.
posted by Bugbread at 3:03 AM on February 12, 2006
posted by Bugbread at 3:03 AM on February 12, 2006
...with handbag swinging and epithets. ...
Go peddle your anti-gay slurs elsewhere.
posted by amberglow at 3:12 AM on February 12, 2006
Go peddle your anti-gay slurs elsewhere.
posted by amberglow at 3:12 AM on February 12, 2006
I'm not "picking on" amberglow.
Oh aye you are , Rothko's gone so you're looking for someone else to wind up and have a go at - Your main task on Mefi from now on should be not to get in conflict with anyone for a while , lose the paragraphs and keep your head down.
Can anyone recall when EB actually posted something of interest on Metafilter ?
I personally cant recall anything.
Plus I'd like to be reimbursed for the cost of one scorched mousewheel from scrolling away from your verbose comments - its like having the vietnam war memorial in every thread.
Etheral Mousewheel - it's a snappy name.
posted by sgt.serenity at 3:15 AM on February 12, 2006
Oh aye you are , Rothko's gone so you're looking for someone else to wind up and have a go at - Your main task on Mefi from now on should be not to get in conflict with anyone for a while , lose the paragraphs and keep your head down.
Can anyone recall when EB actually posted something of interest on Metafilter ?
I personally cant recall anything.
Plus I'd like to be reimbursed for the cost of one scorched mousewheel from scrolling away from your verbose comments - its like having the vietnam war memorial in every thread.
Etheral Mousewheel - it's a snappy name.
posted by sgt.serenity at 3:15 AM on February 12, 2006
whoah, EB - really? With the handbag swinging? Way bad form. Yikes.
I'm not a fan of so many politics/news posts on MeFi, personally, either in terms of number or quality. But I just think that the same criteria that generally applies to other posts should also be applied to them: if it's obvious/ordinary/ubiquitous, I don't think it's a good idea to post it here. If it's interesting and unusual and adds something new, it's fair game.
So, yeah, I guess my personal preference would be: go ahead and delete away on all clearly low-quality posts, including political/news-oriented ones, no matter how many comments they accrue, or what complaints ensue* as a result. Good news/pol. posts should obviously shine... and therefore stay.
* whatever you do or don't do, there will be complaints, and lots of 'em. Complaints are the new black.
posted by taz at 4:11 AM on February 12, 2006
I'm not a fan of so many politics/news posts on MeFi, personally, either in terms of number or quality. But I just think that the same criteria that generally applies to other posts should also be applied to them: if it's obvious/ordinary/ubiquitous, I don't think it's a good idea to post it here. If it's interesting and unusual and adds something new, it's fair game.
So, yeah, I guess my personal preference would be: go ahead and delete away on all clearly low-quality posts, including political/news-oriented ones, no matter how many comments they accrue, or what complaints ensue* as a result. Good news/pol. posts should obviously shine... and therefore stay.
* whatever you do or don't do, there will be complaints, and lots of 'em. Complaints are the new black.
posted by taz at 4:11 AM on February 12, 2006
...with handbag swinging and epithets. ...
Go peddle your anti-gay slurs elsewhere.
You're an doofus, amberglow. Honestly. It wouldn't be possible for me to be more disinterested than I am in what you do with your genitals.
It was a reference to this,
which has a long history here of being shown when going all Pearl Harbor Reenactment but coming off slightly less impressive.
And sometimes not even when making fun of people who are all gay and stuff! Imagine that.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:15 AM on February 12, 2006
Go peddle your anti-gay slurs elsewhere.
You're an doofus, amberglow. Honestly. It wouldn't be possible for me to be more disinterested than I am in what you do with your genitals.
It was a reference to this,
which has a long history here of being shown when going all Pearl Harbor Reenactment but coming off slightly less impressive.
And sometimes not even when making fun of people who are all gay and stuff! Imagine that.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:15 AM on February 12, 2006
whoah, EB - really? With the handbag swinging? Way bad form. Yikes.
No, that was me. Bad form? Hmmph. Usually I find myself in slavish agreement with whatever taz says, but, well, whatever. It's my bedtime.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:20 AM on February 12, 2006
No, that was me. Bad form? Hmmph. Usually I find myself in slavish agreement with whatever taz says, but, well, whatever. It's my bedtime.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:20 AM on February 12, 2006
oh, shit! I blamed EB.
*spanks stavros, then self *
(I knew I stayed out of these threads for a reason; I'm frankly not up to the challenge.)
posted by taz at 4:21 AM on February 12, 2006
*spanks stavros, then self *
(I knew I stayed out of these threads for a reason; I'm frankly not up to the challenge.)
posted by taz at 4:21 AM on February 12, 2006
I'm not picking on amberglow. Even if I were, he can take care of himself.
"Your main task on Mefi from now on should be not to get in conflict with anyone for a while , lose the paragraphs and keep your head down."
Why? And "no". I'm not the one who got banned. I've never been banned. My comments are hardly ever deleted. Deal with it.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 6:46 AM on February 12, 2006
"Your main task on Mefi from now on should be not to get in conflict with anyone for a while , lose the paragraphs and keep your head down."
Why? And "no". I'm not the one who got banned. I've never been banned. My comments are hardly ever deleted. Deal with it.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 6:46 AM on February 12, 2006
My comments are hardly ever deleted.
because nobody ever reads them.
posted by sgt.serenity at 1:26 PM on February 12, 2006
because nobody ever reads them.
posted by sgt.serenity at 1:26 PM on February 12, 2006
Hey sgt., I can think of at least one thing of interest that Etheral posted, but I can't seem to think of anything interested you ever posted. Maybe we shouldn't make posts about our respective memories of someones posts, and post some arguments instead? Do you have any except ordering people around and ignoring the point?
posted by Snyder at 2:41 PM on February 12, 2006
posted by Snyder at 2:41 PM on February 12, 2006
because nobody ever reads them.
posted by sonofsamiam at 3:24 PM on February 12, 2006
posted by sonofsamiam at 3:24 PM on February 12, 2006
I read 'em. I find EB's comments generally pretty interesting, and unlike some folks, he takes the time to point out the reasons behind his statements. Some people like comments like "Bob sucks", some people like comments like "Bob sucks because...". I tend to be in the latter camp, so I like EB's posting style.
And, yeah, off the top of my head, I can think of some interesting things EB's said, but nothing sgt. serenity said. Not that what sgt. serenity has said is bad, just that nothing has jumped out enough to remember.
posted by Bugbread at 6:55 PM on February 12, 2006
And, yeah, off the top of my head, I can think of some interesting things EB's said, but nothing sgt. serenity said. Not that what sgt. serenity has said is bad, just that nothing has jumped out enough to remember.
posted by Bugbread at 6:55 PM on February 12, 2006
Wait a minute, Sarge made one of my favorite Metatalk posts.
posted by LarryC at 7:09 PM on February 12, 2006
posted by LarryC at 7:09 PM on February 12, 2006
Sunday, February 12th, 2006. I stand in the smoking rubble and survey the field of battle. The sight before me is encouraging. The front page contains many posts from this weekend. Among the topics: children's drawings of their alien abductions, financial planning, Darwin's birthday, Polish movie posters, punk rock history, State of the World 2006, School of the Air, Nazi occupation, logical fallacies, and music history on the London tube map. This reporter is happy to convey to you the news that MeFi has once again been pulled back from its teetering position on the brink of obsession with US news and politics. Thanks to the diligence of its community, the Blue is saved once again, the sky will remain firmly in place, and the sun is expected to rise tomorrow. Huzzah, good people of MeFi! Huzzah!
posted by Miko at 7:27 PM on February 12, 2006
posted by Miko at 7:27 PM on February 12, 2006
Huzzah!
*breaks out the accordian for a celebratory hoedown*
posted by raedyn at 6:13 PM on February 13, 2006
*breaks out the accordian for a celebratory hoedown*
posted by raedyn at 6:13 PM on February 13, 2006
*slaps thigh, stomps foot, gets slapped because not his thigh*
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:48 PM on February 13, 2006
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:48 PM on February 13, 2006
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
I'm a slouch when it comes to posting, because I'm askeered of you people and your high standards. Plus I'm too new to contribute yet, I'm an amateur. But I know what I see, and yesterday was pretty annoying. I'm no Bush fan, I'm no happy political monkey but is this taking over the site a little too much? How to ask for discretion, please?
posted by Slap Incognito at 5:37 AM on February 10, 2006