Can we hold you to that? May 15, 2006 10:18 AM   Subscribe


This is a good policy to have had anyhow. And it highlights the problem of running with single-link news from partisan sources.
posted by dios at 10:19 AM on May 15, 2006


ok.
posted by puke & cry at 10:24 AM on May 15, 2006



posted by monju_bosatsu at 10:33 AM on May 15, 2006


I'll let this thread go for awhile before I start another thread about this thread.
posted by geoff. at 10:33 AM on May 15, 2006


I'm agreeing with Dios.

(No, the end of the world is not near -- the Cubs still suck.)

I don't mind partisan links, but single links to Drudge or LGF or Truthout or Rawstory are bad -- and citing them for "FOO indicited is wrong.
posted by eriko at 10:34 AM on May 15, 2006


*gets pitchforks ready, sees that dios agrees, puts the weapons away* dang it.
posted by wheelieman at 10:35 AM on May 15, 2006


There are rumors on the internet? Even big time politicians can get fooled. But that's what you get for listening to personal injury lawyer Sam Bernstein...

Good for Jennifer Granholm though! Half a million more in the bank. Hopefully we'll get to keep her.

And on topic, I agree it was a poor post for the front page and that truthout is unreliable. Maybe could have been there with some supporting links, but alone, just not enough. Rove's indictment will do nothing in the greater scheme of things anyway, except cause us on the left to be more morose, while the rest of America buys into the status quo.
posted by Roger Dodger at 10:37 AM on May 15, 2006


I saw this post over the weekend and it was unclear what had actually happened without reading all the assorted links etc. I'm all for keeping the updatefilter/rumorfilter posts to a minimum.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:41 AM on May 15, 2006


i thought the left was supposed to reality based. these kind of wishful FPPs make us look bad.
posted by keswick at 10:43 AM on May 15, 2006


I don't know about reality-based, but I know that without Stalin the workingman will never get a fair shake.

Oh, maybe that's not the left you're talking about.
posted by Astro Zombie at 10:46 AM on May 15, 2006


Commentary on the issue. Mostly journalistic navel-gazing: "What if a blogger was right? OMG"
posted by GuyZero at 10:46 AM on May 15, 2006


O give me a cove
where they beef about Rove

posted by cortex at 10:49 AM on May 15, 2006


I woulda went for 'grove'.
posted by sonofsamiam at 10:55 AM on May 15, 2006


Anything to limit newsfilter. Also, dios happens to be correct. If the poster had waited until this morning and collected a bunch of interesting commentary links about how the rumors are flying, it would be a half-interesting fpp.
posted by mzurer at 10:56 AM on May 15, 2006


and they fear what the canatloupes say
posted by poppo at 10:57 AM on May 15, 2006


Ooh, yeah. Grove would have been better.
posted by cortex at 10:58 AM on May 15, 2006


links are going to be banned from mefi.

What does that mean? A filter on new posts, or just immediate deletion?

Does it apply to just FPPs, or commments too?

Are there any sites which are already 'banned'?

I agree that the post in question was pretty weak, delete-worthy even, but to blacklist entire sites seems goofy.

While I still can, allow to say the following rant from truthout is forthwith my implied comment to any thread related to Chimpy or Tubby:
Why the anger? It can be summed up in one run-on sentence: We have lost two towers in New York, a part of the Pentagon, an important American city called New Orleans, our economic solvency, our global reputation, our moral authority, our children's future, we have lost tens of thousands of American soldiers to death and grievous injury, we must endure the Abramoffs and the Cunninghams and the Libbys and the whores and the bribes and the utter corruption, we must contemplate the staggering depth of the hole we have been hurled down into, and we expect little to no help from the mainstream DC press, whose lazy go-along-to-get-along cocktail-circuit mentality allowed so much of this to happen because they failed comprehensively to do their job.
Oh, and dios, gloat much?
posted by If I Had An Anus at 10:59 AM on May 15, 2006 [1 favorite]


er... ok. mathowie has a legitimate point (I tend not to read those sites anyway), but I also am curious about why this is posted in MeTa? Is it to make sure #1 follows through? 2) A oblique rerun of the Onelink newspost/rumor (OLN/R) complaint, 3) A snipe about Left-ist rumors, 4) Ongoing campaign to quell perceived Bush bashing.

because, and this is only my opinion, not direct Dios bashing, 1) is arrogant 2) Sometimes it happens, #1 already is addressing the issue so see first point, 3) see second point 4) The nature of the place is left of center, I doubt political posts are going to be banned, and most political posts are not pro-Bush and frankly will never be.

I think this is a poor MeTa, in that we have to infer what the complaint is about.
posted by edgeways at 10:59 AM on May 15, 2006


I don't think 'gloat' is the word you were looking for.
posted by Roger Dodger at 11:01 AM on May 15, 2006


We're being trolled again.

Everyone has lost up to this point.
posted by StrasbourgSecaucus at 11:01 AM on May 15, 2006


I don't know that banning links to certain sites is a good policy to have on MeFi.

I understand that some sources credibility is questionable, but people in the thread were pretty good about questioning its credibility, which I personally feel negates the need for outright censorship or bannination or whatever you want to call it.

Incidentally, Salon did blog about this and also question the credibility of the source.

Information longs to be free. Let the people decide what to do with it. The MeFi hive mind caught on just fine this time, and will in the future, too.
posted by twiggy at 11:01 AM on May 15, 2006


Please tack on LGF and DailyKos while we're blacklisting. MeFi is my break from that insanity - my bleary-eyed 9AM caffeine-pill-still-kicking-in morning reading. LGF, DailyKos, Drudge, and partisan rumor crap fueled by batshit delusions on both sides are all there for when that 4PM malaise sets in and I need to fill my soul with hatred in order to slog through the rest of the day.
posted by Ryvar at 11:03 AM on May 15, 2006


I think this is a poor MeTa, in that we have to infer what the complaint is about.

We have to infer what, exactly? It's a snark-flavored reminder and request for followup—hard to make much else of it without a good bit of streeeeetching.

So I'm going with #1, I guess.
posted by cortex at 11:07 AM on May 15, 2006


What cortex said. And dios.
posted by Ryvar at 11:09 AM on May 15, 2006


What Ryvar said.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 11:11 AM on May 15, 2006


If this step is taken, please make available a list of unapproved sites, preferably linked to on the front page.
posted by sonofsamiam at 11:12 AM on May 15, 2006


What Alvy said.
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:17 AM on May 15, 2006


If this step is taken, please make available a list of unapproved sites, preferably linked to on the front page.

I really, really hope this step is not taken. However, if it is, I second sonofsamiam's request to have said list available and made prominently visible.
posted by twiggy at 11:18 AM on May 15, 2006


We should have a whitelist of sites; that way there aren't any surprises or anything offensive.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 11:26 AM on May 15, 2006


Yeah, we need a list.

Let's put warning labels on everything too!

We obviously can't be treated like adults and trusted to make our own decisions about what is and is not a good FPP. So let's keep a running list of what we're not allowed to post.
posted by StrasbourgSecaucus at 11:27 AM on May 15, 2006


I didn't say it in a "oh my god I'm going to code up a banned list!" way, I said it in a "well, looks like I can add 'truthout' to the list of BS rumor sites that I will more easily delete posts from"

Stuff on LGF, daily kos, democratic underground, drudge, and rawstory tend to get deleted because they tend to post unsupported rumors. It looks like truthout is one to add to that list, so in the future, if someone posts a mouth foaming OH MY GOD BUSH WILL GET IMPEACHED!!!1!! post and it links to truthout and has no sources backing it up, it will be deleted just like similar posts sourced only from the other sites I listed.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:27 AM on May 15, 2006


matt, obviously coding up a list would be silly. But my point is that this seems to be much ado about nothing. Every once in a while one of these slips through. Most of them get deleted. Sometimes they stick around though. Big deal, nobody's perfect. It hasn't really ruined anyone's day in the end.

My point is I just don't see the purpose of this MeTa.
posted by StrasbourgSecaucus at 11:31 AM on May 15, 2006


Karl Rove vs. the Unicorns.
posted by b1tr0t at 11:34 AM on May 15, 2006


omg M4TT, ur a tyr4nt!11!1!!!
posted by kosem at 11:35 AM on May 15, 2006


I agree that this was a pretty crap post, because 1) the story behind the story is probably going to be more interesting (especially if Leopold outs his sources as he's threatened to do) but we won't know that until later this week, and 2) because it got my hopes up, and that's just mean.
I like TruthOut a lot, but a single link to them on an unsupported scoop isn't much of an FPP. I'm with Matt on that one.

Also, what Astro Zombie said, except for the part about the thing.
posted by maryh at 11:38 AM on May 15, 2006


Ib1tr0t writes "Karl Rove vs. the Unicorns."

I'm a little taken aback at the volume of news stories featuring unicorns.
posted by mr_roboto at 11:39 AM on May 15, 2006


OH MY GOD TRUTHOUT WILL GET BANNED!!!1!!
posted by dios to etiquette/policy at 1:18 PM EST

posted by If I Had An Anus at 11:39 AM on May 15, 2006


I guess the truth isn't getting out after all.
posted by Ryvar at 11:41 AM on May 15, 2006


So is Newsmax.com still ok? They are, after all, America's Newspage. Vote Laura in 2008!
posted by blue_beetle at 11:42 AM on May 15, 2006


What Astro Zombie said.
posted by sveskemus at 11:42 AM on May 15, 2006


Was your first comment too subtle, IIHAA?
posted by monju_bosatsu at 11:46 AM on May 15, 2006


The truth dislikes mondays.
posted by b1tr0t at 11:47 AM on May 15, 2006


Well done, Anus. Well done, indeed. Do you run truthout or something?
posted by boo_radley at 11:48 AM on May 15, 2006


Other than the obvious rumorfilter of the post, the thing that buggedme was the poster thumbing their nose at everyone while defending the thread.
posted by terrapin at 11:59 AM on May 15, 2006


What bugbread said.
posted by Bugbread at 11:59 AM on May 15, 2006


self-gratification
posted by StrasbourgSecaucus at 12:11 PM on May 15, 2006



posted by Mean Mr. Bucket at 12:19 PM on May 15, 2006


1. Proximal but cigar-lacking, Strasbourg.
2. Cover art submissions were last week, Bucket.
posted by cortex at 12:21 PM on May 15, 2006


This may just be me, but do mathowie's impersonations of us bother anyone else? Whenever he uses his "average mefite voice" there are always lots of "dood"'s and "OMG"'s and "LOL"'s. I mean, come on mathowie. DONT PLAYA HAT DOOD!!!11!! LOLLERSKATES!!!!ELEVEN!!!!
posted by ND¢ at 12:28 PM on May 15, 2006


s/bother/entertain/, yes. At the risk of answering too seriously, I take it as a caricature of the lower mode of internet/forum behavior in general rather than a stylistic indictment of the mefi userbase.

also dongs rofl
posted by cortex at 12:31 PM on May 15, 2006


I'm making fun of someone going against their better judgment and posting a link to a rumor they want to be true so badly that they post it anyway.

When I'm in that frame of mind myself, I talk like DOOD OMG FUKKIN BUSH IS GOING DOWN!!!11one!
posted by mathowie (staff) at 12:35 PM on May 15, 2006


What dong_resin said.
posted by BobFrapples at 12:36 PM on May 15, 2006




"I don't know that banning links to certain sites is a good policy to have on MeFi."

I think instead of banning the sites he should ban the posters, as well as anyone commenting in that thread, or this one.

Oops!

I often wish the MeFi politicos would get their own fucking MetaFilter. I know Matt's turned down an official news.MeFi for good reason, but I think restrictions on blatantly partisan FPPs (from either 'side'; puppet on the right, or puppet on the left) might encourage them to go slither off to somewhere where they can circlejerk themselves into blissful oblivion. Maybe Matt can release a GNU version of the MeFi code and say, "There you are, now go create your own site where you can bicker all you want. Grownups are talking here."
posted by Eideteker at 12:41 PM on May 15, 2006


Like this, Matt?
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 12:44 PM on May 15, 2006


Or this.
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 12:50 PM on May 15, 2006


Where be the dong_resin I hear tell of?
posted by sonofsamiam at 12:59 PM on May 15, 2006


What dong_resin said.

???

Was it deleted?


Also, can we also ban Capitol Hill Blue from the front page?
posted by CunningLinguist at 1:03 PM on May 15, 2006


Metafilter: DOOD OMG FUKKIN BUSH IS GOING DOWN!!!11one!
posted by klangklangston at 1:05 PM on May 15, 2006


What goatse_king said.
posted by brain_drain at 1:07 PM on May 15, 2006


What Miguel said.
posted by furiousthought at 1:10 PM on May 15, 2006


You people are the biggest fucking nerds ever. Mind if I stay awhile?
posted by Mean Mr. Bucket at 1:12 PM on May 15, 2006


also I really dislike the use of literal "one" in these caricatures—"omg lol wtf!!!!!11one!1"—because it's over-explaining the joke. I get the one-more-level-of-absurdity aspect, and I probably did chuckle the first couple times I saw it, but now it just stinks of caring more about pointing out that you get the joke than the joke itself.

Like following up a bit of wry humor with a huge wink and an elbow to the ribs. Desist, sir!

posted by cortex at 1:13 PM on May 15, 2006


cortex: "Like following up a bit of wry humor with a huge wink and an elbow to the ribs. Desist, sir!"

Say no more!
posted by ewagoner at 1:19 PM on May 15, 2006


My friends don't like it when I tell them a joke and then explain to them why the joke is funny. The problem is that I am both smarter and funnier than all my friends, so they might miss out on the hilarity that is me because they are not smart enough to understand it. So I think explaining why a joke is funny is the kind thing to do, like giving candy to retarded children. I told them that, and I haven't heard from them since.
posted by ND¢ at 1:28 PM on May 15, 2006


I cannot fucking wait for ironic (OR OMG IS IT???777///#DIV0) leetspeak to disappear.
posted by fleacircus at 1:34 PM on May 15, 2006


It's not true l3375p33k unless it includes 3-letter insults about your sexuality.
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 1:45 PM on May 15, 2006


You people are the biggest fucking nerds ever. Mind if I stay awhile?
posted by Mean Mr. Bucket


Yes, we do mind. Because you're mean and we don't like buckets here. Unless it's Charlie Bucket, he's ok.
posted by SassHat at 1:47 PM on May 15, 2006


"It's not true l3375p33k unless it includes 3-letter insults about your sexuality."

64Y.
posted by klangklangston at 1:51 PM on May 15, 2006


And F46...
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 2:00 PM on May 15, 2006


Well, this thread has devolved quite a bit but let me just say, if you read the thread it's obvious I wasn't exactly happy with the thread while it was up.
posted by delmoi at 2:02 PM on May 15, 2006


STR8.

H3T.
posted by sonofsamiam at 2:24 PM on May 15, 2006


Unicorns, indicted.

Clearly, a well-balanced portfolio would be invested in both unicorns and indictment.
posted by b1tr0t at 2:51 PM on May 15, 2006


let's not forget F3Y
posted by delmoi at 3:48 PM on May 15, 2006


Or B1.
posted by Asparagirl at 4:17 PM on May 15, 2006


p0ly4m0ry 4 3v4r.
posted by Bugbread at 4:30 PM on May 15, 2006


Wait, so was he indicted or not?
posted by cellphone at 5:03 PM on May 15, 2006


WE'RE ALL INDICTED! WE'VE INDICTED OURSELVES!
posted by cortex at 5:28 PM on May 15, 2006


I think Matt's "Average MeFite" impersonations are hilarious and obvious caricatures. They shouldn't be insulting to anyone, considering that I've never seen leetspeak on MeFi for any non-satirical purpose.
posted by CRM114 at 6:26 PM on May 15, 2006


Wait, so was he indicted or not?

Apparently it was just a wild rumor. (Big surprise!)
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 6:53 PM on May 15, 2006


Isn't that thinly veiled republican memory hole Stevey C Den Krusty????????????????????????????????
posted by cellphone at 7:56 PM on May 15, 2006


MTR. Figure it out.
posted by delmoi at 12:36 AM on May 16, 2006


The Freep's our liberal paper, at least generally (the restructuring of the JOA has left things a bit more blurry). The Detroit News is gonna be the one that's all Republican.
posted by klangklangston at 5:09 AM on May 16, 2006


It's likely the original poster didn't really think it was actually a true or credible story or even care either way but rather suspected it would be interesting and controversial throughout the intr0web and Metafilter users would produce fun commentary.

Also the original poster was probably surprised to see people like delmoi react with such strong emotions and, having observed said reactions and determined the commenters in question to be weak and silly, had little recourse but to thumb his/her nose while defending the thread.
posted by thirteenkiller at 10:19 AM on May 16, 2006


If we allow newsfilter then there is always going to be a race to be the first one to post the latest news. Shitty rumors get posted because people are afraid that if they wait for CNN someone else will post it first.
posted by LarryC at 10:58 AM on May 16, 2006


You people are the biggest fucking nerds ever. Mind if I stay awhile?

Do we get to put our balls in your top?
posted by darukaru at 10:59 AM on May 16, 2006


Also the original poster was probably surprised to see people like delmoi react with such strong emotions and, having observed said reactions and determined the commenters in question to be weak and silly, had little recourse but to thumb his/her nose while defending the thread.

More likely you're just an idiot.
posted by delmoi at 12:35 PM on May 16, 2006


It's likely the original poster didn't really think it was actually a true or credible story or even care either way but rather suspected it would be interesting and controversial throughout the intr0web and Metafilter users would produce fun commentary.

Wow, and asshole AND an admitted troll.
posted by terrapin at 12:42 PM on May 16, 2006


Terrapin, the only people I thumbed my nose at were the ones who spazzed out and attacked me for the post. Why can't people just take it easy a little?
posted by thirteenkiller at 2:01 PM on May 16, 2006


Terrapin, the only people I thumbed my nose at were the ones who spazzed out and attacked me for the post. Why can't people just take it easy a little?

Because the post SUCKED.

If you consider:


"If by "indicted" you mean "claimed to have been indicted by some random web page"."

"No, todays is that it's rumored to have actually happened.
Monday's story will be that it's actually happened."

"No, the story is that some random website with no credibility said that it happened, and no major news sources confirmed that it has happened."


and

"I mean tk, did you actually read the article? The author claims to tell us what happened in a private meeting with Fitzgerald and Luskin (Rove's Lawyer);

That's not how it happens normally, the indictment gets filed with the court, (which then becomes a part of the public record) and then the indictment is sent to the other lawyer.

So we're supposed to believe that this "Jason Leopold" has access to better sources then anyone in the Washington establishment (like that works at the NYT or Post and has been getting info from Luskin all along?)

And even if it were true, it wouldn't make rove officially "indicted" until the indictment is filed with the court, IMO.

An author who's had his articles retracted by the NYT and Salon? (The link is to an 'alternative' news source that takes Leopold's side, but it does say his reputation is ruined. Well if his reputation is bad, should we really trust him here?)
"

"personal attacks" You're the one who's 'weak' and needs to grow a thicker skin.
posted by delmoi at 3:12 PM on May 16, 2006


See look, you're STILL upset about it! Dork.
posted by thirteenkiller at 3:49 PM on May 16, 2006


Hey wait, just a couple posts ago you called me an idiot.
posted by thirteenkiller at 3:50 PM on May 16, 2006


See look, you're STILL upset about it! Dork

The post was crap and so is talking about yourself in the third person. However look on the bright side, now it will be easier to axe rumorfilter posts until there's something credible behind them.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 3:59 PM on May 16, 2006


People like crap posts.
posted by thirteenkiller at 4:12 PM on May 16, 2006


People like porn, too, but you don't post it on the front page of MetaFilter.
posted by Bugbread at 4:46 PM on May 16, 2006


Wsj article.

There's nothing wrong with being upset about inaccuracy, I have no idea why you think there would be.
posted by delmoi at 6:48 PM on May 16, 2006


also dongs rofl

seconded. we are all one in the great internet sea, if I (and others) can make fun of you/us all by going "OMG GUYZ GRATE POST BUSH SUXX AGAIN!@ZZZz!!11 way to be politically active" then certainly so can Matt.
posted by blacklite at 11:30 PM on May 16, 2006


Just for the record: Truthout's Marc Ash has posted an apology and a grudging retraction of the story.

No indication of whether Jason Leopold still has posting privileges there.
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 10:53 PM on May 19, 2006


I am reminded of that Brady Bunch episode where Greg insists on holding everyone to their "exact words" and winds up washing the car at midnight or something.
posted by adamrice at 2:56 PM on June 14, 2006


« Older London meetup reminder   |   Add-remove favorite link bug Newer »

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