Self link July 12, 2006 12:53 PM Subscribe
Yeah, I couldn't figure this one out either.
posted by teleskiving at 12:59 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by teleskiving at 12:59 PM on July 12, 2006
Okay, I did wonder about your initial "hammer" comment.
Kirth, read prostyle's later comment in the thread. The skateboard page is identical to the blog page the poster links to in his profile.
posted by yhbc at 12:59 PM on July 12, 2006
Kirth, read prostyle's later comment in the thread. The skateboard page is identical to the blog page the poster links to in his profile.
posted by yhbc at 12:59 PM on July 12, 2006
It is? When I click the link in his profile, a page in some foreign language comes up, with no boards on it that I can see. Did the poster change his profile? Is nothing sacred? Hasn't enough damage been done?
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:04 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:04 PM on July 12, 2006
Does anybody else get Queen's "Hammer To Fall" stuck in their head when these things come up?
posted by cortex at 1:14 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by cortex at 1:14 PM on July 12, 2006
It's the same way people try to game digg, they write a paragraph article about something and link to their blog rather than the actual content.
Starting here and reading backwards, things are carbon copies. Posts are within a day of each other, with the same links. Accompanying images are identical, with matching filenames and directories on each server. A little too coincidental. I was having trouble pulling up any actual information on the swedish WHOIS but I feel the content is evidence enough.
If he really wanted to share that information why did he avoid assembling it in the standard MeFi posting style? He could have incorporated all of those links into a single, well written paragraph about board art and I wouldn't have given it a second thought. If I am in the wrong and have made a false accusation I will apologize and stumble away with my tail between my legs, feeling dutifully sheepish.
posted by prostyle at 1:16 PM on July 12, 2006
Starting here and reading backwards, things are carbon copies. Posts are within a day of each other, with the same links. Accompanying images are identical, with matching filenames and directories on each server. A little too coincidental. I was having trouble pulling up any actual information on the swedish WHOIS but I feel the content is evidence enough.
If he really wanted to share that information why did he avoid assembling it in the standard MeFi posting style? He could have incorporated all of those links into a single, well written paragraph about board art and I wouldn't have given it a second thought. If I am in the wrong and have made a false accusation I will apologize and stumble away with my tail between my legs, feeling dutifully sheepish.
posted by prostyle at 1:16 PM on July 12, 2006
Maybe the cocogorilla site is a friend of his? I still don't see how this is a cut-and-dry self-link.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 1:18 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by mathowie (staff) at 1:18 PM on July 12, 2006
The WHOIS for the site returns Stockholm, Sweden. Still on the fence?
posted by prostyle at 1:22 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by prostyle at 1:22 PM on July 12, 2006
I find any personal blog with that many ads automatically suspect.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 1:23 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by monju_bosatsu at 1:23 PM on July 12, 2006
I recognize the importance of the rule regarding self-links, but I am always surprised at the amount of effort that some members go through to find out about fairly well hidden self-links (such as, apparently, this one, which I did not recognize and still am unsure about).
Do you check out every post in this way, or did this one in particular catch your attention? Why? The fact that it didn't use the "standard MeFi posting style"?
(All of which is irrelevant to the fact that, yes, if it is a self-link, the post should be removed.)
posted by voltairemodern at 1:24 PM on July 12, 2006
Do you check out every post in this way, or did this one in particular catch your attention? Why? The fact that it didn't use the "standard MeFi posting style"?
(All of which is irrelevant to the fact that, yes, if it is a self-link, the post should be removed.)
posted by voltairemodern at 1:24 PM on July 12, 2006
did this one in particular catch your attention? Why?
Some of us are probably always going to be suspicious of someone who makes the bare minimum of throwaway comments before making the FPP plunge, I suppose.
posted by Gator at 1:28 PM on July 12, 2006
Some of us are probably always going to be suspicious of someone who makes the bare minimum of throwaway comments before making the FPP plunge, I suppose.
posted by Gator at 1:28 PM on July 12, 2006
The Technorati page is conclusive, yes. Could the callouts of these things maybe include some of the evidence?
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:29 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:29 PM on July 12, 2006
Good looking out, prostyle.
posted by SenshiNeko at 1:29 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by SenshiNeko at 1:29 PM on July 12, 2006
gator: i agree lol
posted by boo_radley at 1:30 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by boo_radley at 1:30 PM on July 12, 2006
P.S., I still think we should de-link the link when a self-linker is outed. I know, I know,
posted by Gator at 1:31 PM on July 12, 2006
noindex, nofollow, but still, the link is still there and can be clicked.posted by Gator at 1:31 PM on July 12, 2006
self-links are one of the few hard and fast rules we have here and while mathowie and I rarely have the time to investigate posts that just sort of smell funny, it's not a bad thing when other people do it as long as it doesn't turn into some pitchfork-fest. I removed the post, banned the poster.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 1:31 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 1:31 PM on July 12, 2006
On Korak's Technorati page, he's claimed both blogs.
Now that's proof. Without that, I'd say it's possible for one person in Stockholm to like a blog by someone else.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 1:32 PM on July 12, 2006
Now that's proof. Without that, I'd say it's possible for one person in Stockholm to like a blog by someone else.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 1:32 PM on July 12, 2006
Thanks for that supporting evidence, camcgee. I did not think of checking that avenue.
Do you check out every post in this way...
No.
The fact that it didn't use the "standard MeFi posting style"?
Yes, that lead me to look at the content with a little more attention to detail than I usually do. The "style" of the blog also threw me, it seemed to follow a certain generic outline that I see employed quite frequently when users attempt to game sites. When I followed the link from his profile, I was astounded at the similarities. Then I looked at his five comments (a referenced activity on self-linkers-past) and they all seemed particularly throwaway.
I don't pride myself on these proceedings, nor do I partake in them frequently. I just thought this post was about to fall through the cracks and I didn't want to see that happen.
I apologize if my post here was inconclusive, and if I do feel the need to create another of this nature I will attempt to add as many supporting elements as possible before doing so.
posted by prostyle at 1:33 PM on July 12, 2006
Do you check out every post in this way...
No.
The fact that it didn't use the "standard MeFi posting style"?
Yes, that lead me to look at the content with a little more attention to detail than I usually do. The "style" of the blog also threw me, it seemed to follow a certain generic outline that I see employed quite frequently when users attempt to game sites. When I followed the link from his profile, I was astounded at the similarities. Then I looked at his five comments (a referenced activity on self-linkers-past) and they all seemed particularly throwaway.
I don't pride myself on these proceedings, nor do I partake in them frequently. I just thought this post was about to fall through the cracks and I didn't want to see that happen.
I apologize if my post here was inconclusive, and if I do feel the need to create another of this nature I will attempt to add as many supporting elements as possible before doing so.
posted by prostyle at 1:33 PM on July 12, 2006
Good on ya, prostyle. A little more context in the callout would have been helpful, but sometimes it takes a team effort to ferret these things out.
posted by Floydd at 1:38 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by Floydd at 1:38 PM on July 12, 2006
Is there some sort of accepted strategy for trying to slip a self-link on the front page? Wow.
posted by GuyZero at 1:50 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by GuyZero at 1:50 PM on July 12, 2006
Bränn honom! Bränn honom på bål! Jag kan stå för högafflarna, facklorna och popcornen.
posted by soundofsuburbia at 1:52 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by soundofsuburbia at 1:52 PM on July 12, 2006
The reason many will get caught is that:
1) They are self-linking because they really want to promote their site.
2) If they really want to promote their site, they wont just be doing it on metafilter but also elsewhere.
The key around this is to not be able to tie your mefi identity to any other identity you have used for promotion. But then this also means you are probably a short-timer here: post your 5 comments, self-link and move on - which in itself is another suspicious thing.
posted by vacapinta at 1:57 PM on July 12, 2006
1) They are self-linking because they really want to promote their site.
2) If they really want to promote their site, they wont just be doing it on metafilter but also elsewhere.
The key around this is to not be able to tie your mefi identity to any other identity you have used for promotion. But then this also means you are probably a short-timer here: post your 5 comments, self-link and move on - which in itself is another suspicious thing.
posted by vacapinta at 1:57 PM on July 12, 2006
Gator: Some of us are probably always going to be suspicious of someone who makes the bare minimum of throwaway comments before making the FPP plunge, I suppose.
How about those of us that never graduate from making lots and lots of comments but can't find anything worthy of making an FPP? Do we come under suspicion? (Maybe just of being unable to STFU? ;P)
posted by Meep! Eek! at 1:57 PM on July 12, 2006
How about those of us that never graduate from making lots and lots of comments but can't find anything worthy of making an FPP? Do we come under suspicion? (Maybe just of being unable to STFU? ;P)
posted by Meep! Eek! at 1:57 PM on July 12, 2006
How about those of us that never graduate from making lots and lots of comments but can't find anything worthy of making an FPP?
Meep! Eek!'s history:
MetaFilter: no posts and 3 comments
MetaTalk: no posts and 5 comments
Ask MeFi: no questions and 15 answers
Are you traveling incognito? 'Cause that doesn't look like someone who cain't shutdereyap to me.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 2:08 PM on July 12, 2006
Meep! Eek!'s history:
MetaFilter: no posts and 3 comments
MetaTalk: no posts and 5 comments
Ask MeFi: no questions and 15 answers
Are you traveling incognito? 'Cause that doesn't look like someone who cain't shutdereyap to me.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 2:08 PM on July 12, 2006
Meep! Eek! if you can't find anything worth fpping why not simply vist another site?
posted by econous at 3:00 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by econous at 3:00 PM on July 12, 2006
econous, is that extremely dry humor, or, uh, what, exactly?
posted by cortex at 3:15 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by cortex at 3:15 PM on July 12, 2006
That's just econous's usual meaninglessness.
posted by fleacircus at 4:15 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by fleacircus at 4:15 PM on July 12, 2006
"Meep! Eek! if you can't find anything worth fpping why not simply vist another site?"
Here's a thought experiment: what if there were a continuing posting quota required for commenting? That is, you have to regularly post in order to be able to comment. What would happen?
I can tell you what would happen—MeFi would be flooded with crap posts. And if there were strict quality control standards on posts and most were deleted, then most of the membership would just give up and move on.
The reason I mention this is because while I understand the sentiment and good intentions behind the "you must post in order to have community credibility" ethos that is so often expressed here in MeTa, I think that in practice it is problematic.
I've long noticed this in the context of callouts of low-quality posts here in MeTa where the poster is excorciated if he/she has made only a few (or no) MeFi posts. But there's an incoherence in that criticism because isn't it necessarily the case, and reasonable, that a person who expects posts to meet a high-quality standard would also find fewer things worth posting, and thus have made fewer posts?
From a personal point of view, the argument is about "standards". But because standards of quality (which is the language in which this is usually discussed) are so very relative, people end up arguing about them. However, what is not relative—and the point that people are missing—are levels of exclusion . Someone who believes that the standard for MeFi posts should be more exclusionary (independent of the particulars of the exclusion) is also going to be someone who posts less. It doesn't make sense, then, to criticize them for posting less than someone who has more inclusive standards.
That said, I think that crunchland's guidelines for good posts and recommended strategies for finding them are things that the most prolific commenters, such as myself, would do well to consider and employ. Even though I think that good posts are hard to find, I'm certain that a moderate amount of effort on the part of some of us (who arguably owe it to the site) could make a big difference.
On the other hand, here's something Matt wrote:
"It's a zen thing I suppose, you can't *try* to find something to post on metafilter, because you'll always fail (or it'll just barely be interesting enough). Instead try to simply surf the web, and if you happen upon something amazing, then share it here. And don't be discouraged if you find one link after 2 hours, or one link after 2 weeks, that's just the way these things go. I rarely post more than a couple times per week here. Believe me, especially when I started the site, I tried and tried to find material for the site everyday and it was mostly crap. It was only when I set aside some random browsing time each day that I happened to find interesting material by accident."
The reason I tend to be critical of posts and am so anti-newsfilter is because I use the web is primarily for news, political opinion, and similar. This type of content, when posted to MeFi, is almost never new to me when it appears here. I'm also quite certain this is not what MeFi was intended to be, nor what has made it special. This is why I try to avoid posting this kind of material, even though I'm often tempted and am in a better position to find and present this sort of stuff than many of those who do. Ironically, or perhaps quite naturally, what I most want from MetaFilter is exactly the sort of material that I don't find on my own—so how likely is it that I'd often find things I think are worth posting?
Finally, I think this quandry of mine illustrates the thinly-veiled conflict that is at the heart of the MetaFilter community: there are those who relate to MeFi as writers, and those who relate to MeFi as readers. I relate to it as a reader in terms of primary content, and as a participant in discussion in terms of the secondary content.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 4:24 PM on July 12, 2006
Here's a thought experiment: what if there were a continuing posting quota required for commenting? That is, you have to regularly post in order to be able to comment. What would happen?
I can tell you what would happen—MeFi would be flooded with crap posts. And if there were strict quality control standards on posts and most were deleted, then most of the membership would just give up and move on.
The reason I mention this is because while I understand the sentiment and good intentions behind the "you must post in order to have community credibility" ethos that is so often expressed here in MeTa, I think that in practice it is problematic.
I've long noticed this in the context of callouts of low-quality posts here in MeTa where the poster is excorciated if he/she has made only a few (or no) MeFi posts. But there's an incoherence in that criticism because isn't it necessarily the case, and reasonable, that a person who expects posts to meet a high-quality standard would also find fewer things worth posting, and thus have made fewer posts?
From a personal point of view, the argument is about "standards". But because standards of quality (which is the language in which this is usually discussed) are so very relative, people end up arguing about them. However, what is not relative—and the point that people are missing—are levels of exclusion . Someone who believes that the standard for MeFi posts should be more exclusionary (independent of the particulars of the exclusion) is also going to be someone who posts less. It doesn't make sense, then, to criticize them for posting less than someone who has more inclusive standards.
That said, I think that crunchland's guidelines for good posts and recommended strategies for finding them are things that the most prolific commenters, such as myself, would do well to consider and employ. Even though I think that good posts are hard to find, I'm certain that a moderate amount of effort on the part of some of us (who arguably owe it to the site) could make a big difference.
On the other hand, here's something Matt wrote:
"It's a zen thing I suppose, you can't *try* to find something to post on metafilter, because you'll always fail (or it'll just barely be interesting enough). Instead try to simply surf the web, and if you happen upon something amazing, then share it here. And don't be discouraged if you find one link after 2 hours, or one link after 2 weeks, that's just the way these things go. I rarely post more than a couple times per week here. Believe me, especially when I started the site, I tried and tried to find material for the site everyday and it was mostly crap. It was only when I set aside some random browsing time each day that I happened to find interesting material by accident."
The reason I tend to be critical of posts and am so anti-newsfilter is because I use the web is primarily for news, political opinion, and similar. This type of content, when posted to MeFi, is almost never new to me when it appears here. I'm also quite certain this is not what MeFi was intended to be, nor what has made it special. This is why I try to avoid posting this kind of material, even though I'm often tempted and am in a better position to find and present this sort of stuff than many of those who do. Ironically, or perhaps quite naturally, what I most want from MetaFilter is exactly the sort of material that I don't find on my own—so how likely is it that I'd often find things I think are worth posting?
Finally, I think this quandry of mine illustrates the thinly-veiled conflict that is at the heart of the MetaFilter community: there are those who relate to MeFi as writers, and those who relate to MeFi as readers. I relate to it as a reader in terms of primary content, and as a participant in discussion in terms of the secondary content.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 4:24 PM on July 12, 2006
But there's an incoherence in that criticism because isn't it necessarily the case, and reasonable, that a person who expects posts to meet a high-quality standard would also find fewer things worth posting, and thus have made fewer posts?
That sounds like a nice argument but sounds also a bit disingenous coming from someone who has a post:comment ratio of about 1:300. Thats the lowest I could find, honestly. For comparison:
mathowie: 1:4
crunchland: 1:7
jonson: 1:8
jonmc: 1:110
miguelcardoso: 1:6
me (for fairness): 1:20
That is, the merits of your argument are undermined by your position, like a short man making an argument that shortness doesnt matter. Arguments are more persuasive when there is no suspected self-motive, when they appear generous and seemingly suspended only by the purest precepts of logic and reason. Don't you agree?
posted by vacapinta at 4:52 PM on July 12, 2006
That sounds like a nice argument but sounds also a bit disingenous coming from someone who has a post:comment ratio of about 1:300. Thats the lowest I could find, honestly. For comparison:
mathowie: 1:4
crunchland: 1:7
jonson: 1:8
jonmc: 1:110
miguelcardoso: 1:6
me (for fairness): 1:20
That is, the merits of your argument are undermined by your position, like a short man making an argument that shortness doesnt matter. Arguments are more persuasive when there is no suspected self-motive, when they appear generous and seemingly suspended only by the purest precepts of logic and reason. Don't you agree?
posted by vacapinta at 4:52 PM on July 12, 2006
I was at about 1:400 earlier this morning (but then I went and posted something).
Have thus condemned myself to fundamental bias, I have to say that I agree with the thrust of EB's argument. Some people have a knack for producing good posts, and some people don't. Presuming that this has anything to do with anything, other than the probably quality of that individual's posts, is pretty goddam silly.
posted by cortex at 5:01 PM on July 12, 2006
Have thus condemned myself to fundamental bias, I have to say that I agree with the thrust of EB's argument. Some people have a knack for producing good posts, and some people don't. Presuming that this has anything to do with anything, other than the probably quality of that individual's posts, is pretty goddam silly.
posted by cortex at 5:01 PM on July 12, 2006
"That is, the merits of your argument are undermined by your position, like a short man making an argument that shortness doesnt matter. Arguments are more persuasive when there is no suspected self-motive, when they appear generous and seemingly suspended only by the purest precepts of logic and reason. Don't you agree?"
No. Notice that you equate merits with persuasiveness, which is unreasonable. Yes, self-interest makes the argument less persuasive because we recognize that bias is more likely; but, no, it doesn't necessarily decrease the merit of any particular argument. The argument's merit is what it is. And I think my argument is sound, whether or not I am self-interested in making it.
And in terms of persuasiveness and bias, I think there's a distinction between arguments that are offensive or defensive. You really can't fault a short man for defending himself against a charge that he's inferior because he's short. Yes, he's self-interested, but not in any unusual sense.
Also, I think that the post to comment ratio is largely (though not completely) unimportant because posts and comments are very different things. Commenting is like being a participant in a discussion while posting is like being a presenter at a conference. I hold myself (and others) to very different standards with regard to commenting and posting.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 5:11 PM on July 12, 2006
No. Notice that you equate merits with persuasiveness, which is unreasonable. Yes, self-interest makes the argument less persuasive because we recognize that bias is more likely; but, no, it doesn't necessarily decrease the merit of any particular argument. The argument's merit is what it is. And I think my argument is sound, whether or not I am self-interested in making it.
And in terms of persuasiveness and bias, I think there's a distinction between arguments that are offensive or defensive. You really can't fault a short man for defending himself against a charge that he's inferior because he's short. Yes, he's self-interested, but not in any unusual sense.
Also, I think that the post to comment ratio is largely (though not completely) unimportant because posts and comments are very different things. Commenting is like being a participant in a discussion while posting is like being a presenter at a conference. I hold myself (and others) to very different standards with regard to commenting and posting.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 5:11 PM on July 12, 2006
A post should be interesting to others? A comment would do well not to be noise?
posted by econous at 5:38 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by econous at 5:38 PM on July 12, 2006
Holy mother of God. I've got to increase my post to comment ratio... oh crap! I'm lowering it right now as I type!!!! Undo, ctrl-z!!
posted by jonson at 6:25 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by jonson at 6:25 PM on July 12, 2006
Meep! Eek! if you can't find anything worth fpping why not simply vist another site?
Please, just call me 'meep'. It's much less of a pain to type. :) I ~do~ visit other sites. I'm just finding AskMeta very, very addictive. As you'll note from PST, I'm over there babbling like a fishwife (no offense meant to any fishwives reading this.)
A post should be interesting to others? A comment would do well not to be noise?
And I've been trying to be more content than noise for the comments. (I've slipped. That 'post comment' button is so very tempting when you think you're being clever, or want to participate)
It's the '..should be interesting to others..' bit that gets me. Metafilter is filled with a lot of very educated, well-spoken individuals who are probably both more intelligent than I am as well as more likely to find the unique corners of the web. (Other than my boring LJ, I have a tendency to surf news sites and legal sites (Can't help it. Occupational habit.) We all surf news sites, and I don't want to be a great bringer of newsfilter. There's enough of that already. And I'm not really sure how many people are going to be interested in the latest developments in how Halliburton's (or Owens Corning's, et al., ad naus.) bankruptcy is affecting those poor bastards with mesothelioma. For that matter, that's newsfilter as well, although it's more specialized newsfilter.)
Pink: Nah, just me. Lurker of years, member of days. :) I finally gave up waiting to come up with the ~perfect~ username ;)
EB: Thanks, I appreciate your viewpoint. I actually am more familiar with the names of those who comment, especially in the gray or green, than those who post FPPs in the blue, so..
Loquacious: Hey, guy, are you giving me the boot ~already~? :P
languagehat: wherever you are, my advance apologies on not flaming out for you. Maybe another time..?
Anyway. I'm probably being more noise that signal with this, so I'll stop there. Thanks for the various input. I really do want to be a valuable member of the community. You guys have been educating and entertaining me for years now. I'd rather like to return the favor.
posted by Meep! Eek! at 6:26 PM on July 12, 2006
Please, just call me 'meep'. It's much less of a pain to type. :) I ~do~ visit other sites. I'm just finding AskMeta very, very addictive. As you'll note from PST, I'm over there babbling like a fishwife (no offense meant to any fishwives reading this.)
A post should be interesting to others? A comment would do well not to be noise?
And I've been trying to be more content than noise for the comments. (I've slipped. That 'post comment' button is so very tempting when you think you're being clever, or want to participate)
It's the '..should be interesting to others..' bit that gets me. Metafilter is filled with a lot of very educated, well-spoken individuals who are probably both more intelligent than I am as well as more likely to find the unique corners of the web. (Other than my boring LJ, I have a tendency to surf news sites and legal sites (Can't help it. Occupational habit.) We all surf news sites, and I don't want to be a great bringer of newsfilter. There's enough of that already. And I'm not really sure how many people are going to be interested in the latest developments in how Halliburton's (or Owens Corning's, et al., ad naus.) bankruptcy is affecting those poor bastards with mesothelioma. For that matter, that's newsfilter as well, although it's more specialized newsfilter.)
Pink: Nah, just me. Lurker of years, member of days. :) I finally gave up waiting to come up with the ~perfect~ username ;)
EB: Thanks, I appreciate your viewpoint. I actually am more familiar with the names of those who comment, especially in the gray or green, than those who post FPPs in the blue, so..
Loquacious: Hey, guy, are you giving me the boot ~already~? :P
languagehat: wherever you are, my advance apologies on not flaming out for you. Maybe another time..?
Anyway. I'm probably being more noise that signal with this, so I'll stop there. Thanks for the various input. I really do want to be a valuable member of the community. You guys have been educating and entertaining me for years now. I'd rather like to return the favor.
posted by Meep! Eek! at 6:26 PM on July 12, 2006
mathowie: 1:4
crunchland: 1:7
jonson: 1:8
jonmc: 1:110
miguelcardoso: 1:6
john: 3:16
It just looked like it belonged there
posted by bunglin jones at 7:04 PM on July 12, 2006
crunchland: 1:7
jonson: 1:8
jonmc: 1:110
miguelcardoso: 1:6
john: 3:16
It just looked like it belonged there
posted by bunglin jones at 7:04 PM on July 12, 2006
jonmc: 1:110
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of radiohead,
I will fear no evil: For the Dictators art with me;
Thy beer nuts and thy copy of Ladies Man, they comfort me.
Thou preparest a rock block of Metallica before me in the presence of mine enemies (esp pitchfork media);
Thou annointest my head with Brylcreem; My cup runneth over with free shots of Jack.
posted by Divine_Wino at 7:25 PM on July 12, 2006 [1 favorite]
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of radiohead,
I will fear no evil: For the Dictators art with me;
Thy beer nuts and thy copy of Ladies Man, they comfort me.
Thou preparest a rock block of Metallica before me in the presence of mine enemies (esp pitchfork media);
Thou annointest my head with Brylcreem; My cup runneth over with free shots of Jack.
posted by Divine_Wino at 7:25 PM on July 12, 2006 [1 favorite]
Loquacious: Hey, guy, are you giving me the boot ~already~? :P
That's not a boot. That's a car-tapult. But it was for the self-linker.
And please, not so loud with the tildes. I have an absinthe hangover that would kill the dead. There's an italics button right down there at the bottom of the comment box.
posted by loquacious at 7:35 PM on July 12, 2006
That's not a boot. That's a car-tapult. But it was for the self-linker.
And please, not so loud with the tildes. I have an absinthe hangover that would kill the dead. There's an italics button right down there at the bottom of the comment box.
posted by loquacious at 7:35 PM on July 12, 2006
Here's a thought experiment: what if there were a continuing posting quota required for commenting?
I am guessing that there are others like me who havebetter other things to do in their free time than surf the web, and whose habit of surfing during workbreaks only really allows them to approach Me* as a reader/commenter, rather than as a poster.
I guess I could just recycle links from other blogs, if necessary, but that seems a bit lazy.
posted by UbuRoivas at 7:43 PM on July 12, 2006
I am guessing that there are others like me who have
I guess I could just recycle links from other blogs, if necessary, but that seems a bit lazy.
posted by UbuRoivas at 7:43 PM on July 12, 2006
Mea culpa. Bad habit of long standing. I shall try to be more HTML.
And if you can't share the absinthe, don't tease us. (I love the stuff. But I live in the US. What's a girl to do?)
posted by Meep! Eek! at 7:43 PM on July 12, 2006
And if you can't share the absinthe, don't tease us. (I love the stuff. But I live in the US. What's a girl to do?)
posted by Meep! Eek! at 7:43 PM on July 12, 2006
I was kidding about the absinthe, so I guess that's a double tease. I talk a lot of smack.
It's ok, I was weaned on BBSes too. I still catch myself using metacharacter markups in webspace.
posted by loquacious at 7:53 PM on July 12, 2006
It's ok, I was weaned on BBSes too. I still catch myself using metacharacter markups in webspace.
posted by loquacious at 7:53 PM on July 12, 2006
I have an absinthe hangover that would kill the dead.
...
I was kidding about the absinthe
Shit, does this mean the dead are alive?
posted by moss at 10:12 PM on July 12, 2006
...
I was kidding about the absinthe
Shit, does this mean the dead are alive?
posted by moss at 10:12 PM on July 12, 2006
Muhhrrrrrrrrr.
posted by loquacious at 10:15 PM on July 12, 2006
posted by loquacious at 10:15 PM on July 12, 2006
That's a car-tapult. But it was for the self-linker.
Revisiting an ancient image macro from SA. So what is your username over there, loq, and how long have you been a goon?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:52 PM on July 12, 2006
Revisiting an ancient image macro from SA. So what is your username over there, loq, and how long have you been a goon?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:52 PM on July 12, 2006
A bit late to the sherlock holmes party, but a really easy way to detect self-linkers is -aside from Technorati- the Google ads. Both sites show the same publisher id. (View-source, search for "pub").
posted by lodev at 1:16 AM on July 13, 2006
posted by lodev at 1:16 AM on July 13, 2006
I was having trouble pulling up any actual information on the swedish WHOIS but I feel the content is evidence enough.
domainname.name: smidigt.se
holder: Robert Birming
Domain.......: COCOGRILLO.COM
Name.........: Robert Birming
posted by mr.marx at 2:07 AM on July 13, 2006
domainname.name: smidigt.se
holder: Robert Birming
Domain.......: COCOGRILLO.COM
Name.........: Robert Birming
posted by mr.marx at 2:07 AM on July 13, 2006
My other account ratio: 1:372
This account ratio: 0:100+
number of members telling me to shut the fuck up, flagging my links as noise or doubles or dragging me to MeTa: 0
posted by NinjaTadpole at 3:11 AM on July 13, 2006
This account ratio: 0:100+
number of members telling me to shut the fuck up, flagging my links as noise or doubles or dragging me to MeTa: 0
posted by NinjaTadpole at 3:11 AM on July 13, 2006
May I again complement the Internet detectives, whose work I always enjoy.
You think you're alone until you realize you're in it now
Fear is here to stay love is here for a minute
They call it instant justice when it's past the legal limit
Someone's knocking at the window, I wonder who is it
The Internet detectives
Watching the Internet detectives
When they bang bang, shoot shoot.
posted by Astro Zombie at 5:44 AM on July 13, 2006
You think you're alone until you realize you're in it now
Fear is here to stay love is here for a minute
They call it instant justice when it's past the legal limit
Someone's knocking at the window, I wonder who is it
The Internet detectives
Watching the Internet detectives
When they bang bang, shoot shoot.
posted by Astro Zombie at 5:44 AM on July 13, 2006
metafilter = ocd
posted by strawberryviagra at 6:28 AM on July 13, 2006
posted by strawberryviagra at 6:28 AM on July 13, 2006
"collective detectives™."
posted by crunchland at 6:38 AM on July 13, 2006
posted by crunchland at 6:38 AM on July 13, 2006
" was kidding about the absinthe, so I guess that's a double tease. I talk a lot of smack."
So, you gonna share your smack, then?
posted by mr_crash_davis at 7:16 AM on July 13, 2006
So, you gonna share your smack, then?
posted by mr_crash_davis at 7:16 AM on July 13, 2006
"Without that, I'd say it's possible for one person in Stockholm to like a blog by someone else."
Only their captors.
posted by klangklangston at 7:57 AM on July 13, 2006 [1 favorite]
Only their captors.
posted by klangklangston at 7:57 AM on July 13, 2006 [1 favorite]
languagehat: wherever you are, my advance apologies on not flaming out for you. Maybe another time..?
Sure, that'd be great. No hard feelings about this one—your heart is obviously in the right place.
posted by languagehat at 9:28 AM on July 13, 2006
Sure, that'd be great. No hard feelings about this one—your heart is obviously in the right place.
posted by languagehat at 9:28 AM on July 13, 2006
[This comment is a test, for which I'm using this now-moot thread. Apologies.]
posted by cribcage at 3:40 PM on July 13, 2006
posted by cribcage at 3:40 PM on July 13, 2006
I'm over there babbling like a fishwife (no offense meant to any fishwives reading this.)
The Tale of the Fishwife and its Sad Fate
See the "Post Comment" button, how she is clicked, and the thread, how he increases in length by one post.
posted by oaf at 4:55 PM on July 13, 2006 [1 favorite]
The Tale of the Fishwife and its Sad Fate
See the "Post Comment" button, how she is clicked, and the thread, how he increases in length by one post.
posted by oaf at 4:55 PM on July 13, 2006 [1 favorite]
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by Kirth Gerson at 12:58 PM on July 12, 2006