Quick Draw June 25, 2007 9:10 AM   Subscribe

I've never seen one of my posts deleted so quickly. You guys are good!
posted by sluglicker to MetaFilter-Related at 9:10 AM (88 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

I have a great deal of respect for languagehat and appreciate his contribution. I had thought about doing more with the post but decided against it because of my own significant reaction to the trailer, and my feeling that others should explore this on their own, as languagehat did. I first came across this with actual footage of people jumping off the bridge. I decided against those vids because of the "snuff film" attribute. I'm not a fan either. Actually, it was the trailer that brought tears to my eyes, and why I linked the word "People" to the video. I was impressed with the bridge and why it had such an appeal to those who were determined to end their life, but more so, the individuals themselves. Maybe I'm too sentimental. That was a post, if made by someone else, I would have favorited. Jess, your job here is pretty difficult, I'm sure. But pulling it after only three comments seems a bit trigger-happy. And yes, I'll show some restraint in the future, but you're really stifling my creativity, man!
posted by sluglicker at 9:10 AM on June 25, 2007


The film has been linked to at least twice on MeFi before with more substantial posts. This is a trailer and only a trailer--doesn't matter what movie it is, a trailer in and of itself is a shitty FPP.
posted by dobbs at 9:13 AM on June 25, 2007


you're really stifling my creativity, man!

cutting and pasting is SO creative!

your comment in the deleted post -

'cause vronsky said I could

shirley bassey singing with an orchestra takes a certain amount of talent

jumping off a bridge takes no talent at all
posted by pyramid termite at 9:21 AM on June 25, 2007


shirley bassey singing with an orchestra takes a certain amount of talent

jumping off a bridge takes no talent at all


Wrong. How do you think Shirley made it back to the 2nd verse?
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 9:26 AM on June 25, 2007 [10 favorites]


a trailer in and of itself is a shitty FPP.

I don't agree. Not in and of itself.

The film has been linked to at least twice

I searched before posting and came up with nothing. Please post the links. If it is a double, then of course, that reason alone is enough for deletion.
posted by sluglicker at 9:26 AM on June 25, 2007


But pulling it after only three comments seems a bit trigger-happy.

So she should have let it amass more comments before deleting it? Just out of curiosity, how long do you think a doomed post should be allowed to live?
posted by Greg Nog at 9:30 AM on June 25, 2007


how long do you think a doomed post should be allowed to live?

An hour or eight comments, which ever comes first.
posted by sluglicker at 9:36 AM on June 25, 2007


It's not my impression that things are primarily deleted based on comments but on flags (plus the admins' judgement). If the post was flagged up the wazoo, it could have no comments at all, and still get nuked.
posted by jacquilynne at 9:37 AM on June 25, 2007


I've never seen one of my posts deleted so quickly.

So what, do you want a cookie or something?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 9:39 AM on June 25, 2007


Quick Draw: You guys are good!

I've had enough premature ejaculation experiences to know sarcasm when I see it.
posted by and hosted from Uranus at 9:41 AM on June 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


'cause vronsky said I could

Vronsky is ruining metafilter.
posted by Dave Faris at 9:41 AM on June 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


I also have a great deal of respect for languagehat!
posted by Kwine at 9:43 AM on June 25, 2007


And if Vronsky jumped off a bridge, would you?

(Please?)
posted by Dave Faris at 9:43 AM on June 25, 2007


I would follow vronsky anywhere.
posted by sluglicker at 9:47 AM on June 25, 2007


That's a good deletion. I wish folks who thought that there threads were special and beyond the guidelines ("my one link crappy advertisement is so a great post!") would reconsider.
posted by OmieWise at 9:52 AM on June 25, 2007


*their...I hate that.
posted by OmieWise at 9:53 AM on June 25, 2007


Maybe I'm misreading, or maybe you're confused, but in case it's the latter: languagehat just happened to be the last person to comment before jessamyn deleted the thread. Languagehat didn't cause it to be deleted.
posted by mendel at 10:00 AM on June 25, 2007


Now let's see how long it takes them to close this thread. Hopefully they're just as quick.
posted by slogger at 10:09 AM on June 25, 2007


This post was deleted for the following reason: the SLYT post are getting a little out of hand, even though this technically goes to Google Video, can we exercise a little restaint perhaps? -- jessamyn

Pony request: please to enable favouriting for thread deletions?
posted by dash_slot- at 10:10 AM on June 25, 2007


Languagehat didn't cause it to be deleted

No, I understand. I found his link and didn't include it in the post because as I said, I thought people should explore this on their own if they were so inclined. I appreciate his thoughts in general and on my post in particular, despite the negative comment. Hey, sometimes you hit and sometimes you miss. I guess on this one I didn't even come close.
posted by sluglicker at 10:14 AM on June 25, 2007


I can see why it was deleted, although I hadn't seen the trailer yet so that was interesting. I've heard about the movie because I know people who were part of it, but hadn't seen any visuals for it yet. I wish the post had more info so it could've stayed up, but there just wasn't enough there.

That said, since one of the main people who encouraged me to move to where I now live jumped of the GG Bridge 9 months later, I've got some conflicting feelings. His death affected me on many deeply personal levels so I want to see the movie yet I simultaneously really don't want to see the movie. And while I'm normally all for snarkiness, I have a hard time reading people's snarky comments on this topic because it's so real to me. For me it isn't a snuff film, but rather something that someone I once knew felt compelled to do, which I still struggle to fathom and have often vividly imagined. Took me over a year before I could drive over the bridge and actually see the view and the bridge itself again... instead I just pictured him strolling along there, hoisting himself over the railing, and eventually hitting the water. And frankly, I don't know that I'll ever stop wishing I could slap the fool upside the head for believing it was a good idea. Years later & I'm still pissed at him for ruining other people's lives the way he clearly did. So, maybe this movie will help people like me find a bit more understanding. That would be better than wanting to slap a dead person every time you see a famous bridge.

Definitely not a feel-good film though.
posted by miss lynnster at 10:14 AM on June 25, 2007 [3 favorites]


sluglicker writes "I searched before posting and came up with nothing. Please post the links. If it is a double, then of course, that reason alone is enough for deletion."

One of the many problems with the youtube spew is they are often posted with zero or even misleading context or description. The post in question is a primo example. The text doesn't give the slightest hint what the vid is about and there aren't even any tags to help searchers out. Doubles are going to be very difficult to search for as long as people insist on making "surprise" posts.
posted by Mitheral at 10:19 AM on June 25, 2007


The film has been linked to at least twice on MeFi before with more substantial posts.

As in this May 27, 2007 post.
posted by ericb at 10:26 AM on June 25, 2007


But pulling it after only three comments seems a bit trigger-happy.

No such thing. More comments wouldn't make it any more or less deletion-worthy, except in the exceptional case that a bad post escapes admin attention so long that it manages to birth a pretty compellingly redemptive thread somehow, and even then you'd better not count your chickens.

A movie trailer isn't generally a great post. There's been a lot of youtubery lately, and while I don't find a link to a video or five bothersome in isolation—it certainly doesn't bug me as much as some folks—but it's been sort of creeping into critical mass territory, in the collective we-were-talking-about-it-in-email-this-morning administrative gut.

So, yeah. Nothing against the film in particular, or the idea of video on the web in general, but I think the great pendulum may be swinging scythward at things as thin as a link to a trailer without explanation, etc. Creativity is totally awesome, but so are good posts, and on the front page the one should usually serve the other and not vice versa.

This recent comment by ericb would have been a much stronger post. There's also this older thread about the film, and just for kicks here's New Yorker article from 2003 on the subject of Golden Gate jumpers.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:32 AM on June 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


No, I understand. I found his link and didn't include it in the post because as I said, I thought people should explore this on their own if they were so inclined.

This is kinda contrary to the 'filter' part of the 'meta.'
posted by desuetude at 10:47 AM on June 25, 2007 [2 favorites]


So, maybe this movie will help people like me find a bit more understanding. That would be better than wanting to slap a dead person every time you see a famous bridge.

It won't bring any understanding, I would guess. I thought it was a bad movie, and one of the few truly immoral films I've ever watched. The kicker for me (SPOILER, guess) was that they saved the most cinematic death for the big finale. That skeeved me out big-time.
posted by Bookhouse at 10:59 AM on June 25, 2007


So, as yet another another single link video pops up on the front page, what's the line that makes one post acceptable and another one, not?
posted by Dave Faris at 11:03 AM on June 25, 2007


what's the line that makes one post acceptable and another one, not?

Not that I speak for the mods or anything, but how about the fact that the post you reference actually explains what the link is and why it might be interesting.
posted by Karmakaze at 11:18 AM on June 25, 2007


I thought it was a bad movie, and one of the few truly immoral films I've ever watched.

Maybe I'm just being dense, but not having seen it, what was so immoral about it? According to the link in languagehat's comment, they prevented several deaths. Or are you of the opinion that they could have prevented all of them?
posted by juv3nal at 11:21 AM on June 25, 2007


What Karmakaze said. It's a film, not a trailer, and it's got some decent background aside. I'd say it's qualitatively a lot better than the deletion in question.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:21 AM on June 25, 2007


Ok. So, music video = ok. Movie = ok. But movie trailers are out.
posted by Dave Faris at 11:24 AM on June 25, 2007


Correction: in the context of too much youtubery, trailers for movies that have been previously discussed are out.
posted by and hosted from Uranus at 11:28 AM on June 25, 2007


There is no line. There has never been a line. That's just baby powder on my nose.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 11:33 AM on June 25, 2007


Well, if it's that kind of thing Bookhouse, then I stand corrected & definitely won't see it.
posted by miss lynnster at 11:40 AM on June 25, 2007


Ok. So, music video = ok. Movie = ok. But movie trailers are out.

Do you honestly expect to see that strict of a definition, ever?

Better = more likely to live, worse = more likely to get deleted. Movie trailer as posted in this case by sluglicker = worse; actual film as posted by nickyskye in this case = better; reasons stated for both; hazy, flexible collective judgement applied case-by-case as things go forward.

I can concieve of situations where any of those three things listed would live, or would be deleted, depending on presentation and timing and context. There's no sane way to present a hard defintion here.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:47 AM on June 25, 2007


Since people like making youtube posts, it's hard to know what would make something link worthy and what's not unless you guys give specific guidelines.

What, for example, allowed Vronsky's music video to stay this morning? It provided no more context than Sluglicker's movie trailer. One stayed, one didn't. Why? If sluglicker had added the link that languagehat added, would that have been enough to save it? How about a couple of wiki links, too?

Unless you guys try and provide some concrete guidelines about what flies and what doesn't, the next time a sluglicker comes along, he'll have every right to complain when his post gets axed, while a vronsky-like music video skates by.
posted by Dave Faris at 11:54 AM on June 25, 2007


If the post had been better presented it probably would have lived to see another day, but in it's current form it deserved what it got.
posted by blue_beetle at 12:04 PM on June 25, 2007


what was so immoral about it?

Well, like I said, I think there's something immoral (and, to be clear, I'm not talking Nazi-immoral here, just something beyond simple bad taste) about glamorizing the actual death of a human being, which, to my mind, they do by having all the okay-shot deaths build up to the slam-bang cinematic zowie! In-Focus Flip of Death! It's good that they saved some lives, but that doesn't mean that I don't find the film icky. Others may feel otherwise.
posted by Bookhouse at 12:09 PM on June 25, 2007


Actually, thinking on it again after reading juv3nal's comment (duh - 'cuz I overthink)... I'm thinking that where this movie is concerned there will probably be a major difference in the viewing experiences of those whose lives haven't been touched by the subject and those whose have. If someone is considering jumping or knows someone who has, then there's no doubt more to it than morbidly watching strangers kick the bucket. Rather, those strangers all have something in common and could've been someone you know.

Similarly, since most people know someone who was killed by a drunk driver or is an alcoholic, drunk airline pilots aren't as hysterically entertaining as they once were.
posted by miss lynnster at 12:12 PM on June 25, 2007


Unless you guys try and provide some concrete guidelines about what flies and what doesn't, the next time a sluglicker comes along, he'll have every right to complain when his post gets axed, while a vronsky-like music video skates by.

You've been around long enough here to know there are not concrete guidelines. Concrete guidelines stifle the exceptions and sometimes those exceptions can be amazing. You have to trust human judgement to know when to make an exception and when not to.

Here's an example in legislation of a concrete guideline. That one law has been the cause of so much injustice because it took away power from judges, people who we trust to make decisions on a case-by-case basis, and instead sent people to long prison terms for stealing a pack of gum.

Trust the admins. If you question a specific decision then question it. But please stop asking for concrete guidelines.
posted by vacapinta at 12:17 PM on June 25, 2007


I cut out a sentence there, and I shouldn't have. What I was saying was that if you have had your life touched by suicide, then it's not considered a morbid topic you should avoid since it's very real to you and has affected you. Discussing or showing the problem isn't necessarily glamorizing it. It all depends on the filmmakers motives, of course. But the topic is something that many people want to understand and not sweep under the rug. Truth is, there is no rug big enough & it's not healthy to pretend there is. Especially just to make other people comfortable.

If more people talked about it and were open about the problems, then I definitely believe fewer people would probably feel so alone that they feel jumping is the only solution. Also, people have a very glamorized version of jumping off of that damned bridge. I think it's VERY important to show them that IT AIN'T SO NICE. Thanks to my friend, I know a lot more about the truth of what happens than I ever wanted to. It's freakin' grisly.
posted by miss lynnster at 12:18 PM on June 25, 2007


Unless you guys try and provide some concrete guidelines about what flies and what doesn't, the next time a sluglicker comes along, he'll have every right to complain when his post gets axed, while a vronsky-like music video skates by.

And if that happens, we'll listen and answer as best we can and that seems functional enough. Where's the harm in a little confusion and the occasionaly Metatalk complaint to help suss out where the decision-making is coming from and why?

I can see the attraction in proposing a firm set of rules about what does and doesn't fly—it'd be great in that sense if no one was ever caught out by an unexpected deletion—but I don't have a lot of faith in the idea that sufficiently detailed, concrete rules about what's acceptable would be draftable, and I think enforcement and the potential rise in ruleswhoring would be miserable.

I for one would definitely prefer to be poked or shouted at in Metatalk by the occasional aggrieved poster than poke or shouted at by a dozen pedantic policy laywers; I can't speak for Matt or Jess, but from what I've seen in the past and in recent conversation I'd guess they feel pretty similarly. Matt's never entertained a hard, broad set of rules on content.

Anyway, that's where I'm coming from. Posts are of such a wide variety in form and content on the blue that trying to get prescriptive or proscriptive in general seems hard to do; I believe people are better off posting (and will make better posts on the whole) going by gut and familiarity with mefi history, rather than by consulting a rulebook; trends are going to drive administrative decisions enough that writing a static set of rules would probably be impossible; and if the worse that comes of the current system is a few threads a week asking about a deletion, I'm not sure that's a real problem.
posted by cortex (staff) at 12:22 PM on June 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


Obviously, I'm not asking for myself. But if I were sluglicker, I'd definitely ask why his post got axed, but vronsky's didn't. (Personally, I'd have no troubles if both were deleted.) I just figure that vague and inequitable decisions and "gut feelings" can only lead to more complaints here.
posted by Dave Faris at 12:24 PM on June 25, 2007


(And to address the vronksy Bassey thread; best I can say is it's alive because none of has quite deleted it. It's a marginally better thread than sluglicker's, but it's not great and he's been doing a lot of the youtubery and needs to rein that in some.)
posted by cortex (staff) at 12:28 PM on June 25, 2007


I actually wrote a song about this after one of the previous mefi posts on it...

mr steel
how would you feel
if I had a photograph
of one you loved
before they stepped into nothing

how many times
did you reach into your pocket
and do nothing to stop it
and pause and think
of what would make
a better picture

do those who hesitated
know they won't be named
in your dishonest document
of the last choice ever made
of those who won't get paid
for starring in your golden curtain call

mr steel
how would you feel
if I had a photograph
of one you loved
before they stepped into nothing

how many times
did you reach into your pocket
and do nothing to stop it
and pause and think
of what would make
a better picture


..that I had forgotten about.
I should do something with it, if I can remember the chords.
posted by krix at 12:30 PM on June 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


That said, since one of the main people who encouraged me to move to where I now live jumped of the GG Bridge 9 months later, I've got some conflicting feelings.

miss lynnster, as a recent resident and long time fan of San Francisco I may have a few words that might help, or some that may - at the least - resonate.

This place is unlike any city in the US, or perhaps the world.

I arrived here, broke, scared and more or less alone - but with some prospects. Prospects, an interesting word, that, when considering the history of this city. Prospects. A word with interesting roots and long, deep meaning, inextricably entwined with the successes and failures of San Francisco.

But somehow this city seems to provide and bless those that it accepts - often at the last, most impossible moment. From the moment I landed, it's like I've stepped into a Tom Robbins novel - hitched myself into some insane roller coaster with no known end or beginning, no known path other than a stone-carved guarantee that there will be the full range of possible extremes presented and experienced.

People actually fall in love with this city. I have, and am - going through the same emotional rushes, bonding and responses.

Seriously. I've had a dozen experiences of some kind of near-satori where I've caught some glimpse of skyline or some weird view here or there - all of it pretty mundane stuff - but it literally takes my breath away. Just like when I'm falling in love. I've actually gasped aloud while riding the bus, over the dumbest little things. Just sun-dappled buildings, or an interesting, colorful alley.

I thought I was going crazy. And then I mentioned it to some people, and they said they had similar things happen, and that I wasn't actually going crazy - at least, not in that direction.

These strange feelings and emotions of what feels like love as I have known it have lent themselves to a very - unfortunately unusual - sense of contentment and happiness. Happiness. Something that has been elusive in my life, and many like me. The existentialist-empathics who foolishly attempt to bear the immense pain of the world.

While this city isn't for everyone - if anything, it's a city for those that have been rejected by or have rejected all else - those that do come here and fall in love with it, well, it may be the first time they've ever felt at home. And even loved.

Which can be - I'm learning - a deeply profound and even confusing or chaotic experience.

Which brings us to this issue of people jumping off of bridges. Almost always to the bay side, in full view of the city. Almost never to the Pacific side.

I could die here. I could so easily die here, because I would die happy. I can easily see the lure of it. I do not say this lightly, I don't say this to make such idiocy seem romantic.

I can see why someone would choose to take control and make that decision - to die happy. That said, it is most certainly a decision made from fear of loss, therefore a very irrational choice. But I do posit that it must be considered that some are jumping for these very reasons - to ensure that they die happy, to eliminate the gamble entirely.

Even more foolish, as this city seems to enjoy rewarding the humble gamblers.
posted by loquacious at 12:57 PM on June 25, 2007 [4 favorites]


mendel writes 'Maybe I'm misreading, or maybe you're confused, but in case it's the latter: languagehat just happened to be the last person to comment before jessamyn deleted the thread. Languagehat didn't cause it to be deleted.'

Of course he did. Everybody knows that languagehat is a key member of the MeFi secret cabal. His post was a secret signal to the overt members of the cabal.

Dave Faris writes 'Ok. So, music video = ok. Movie = ok. But movie trailers are out.'

I believe the cabal rules provide an exception for Simpsons/South Park movie trailers.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 1:11 PM on June 25, 2007


There is no cabal rules.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:13 PM on June 25, 2007


I've actually gasped aloud

That happens everytime I head up the Marin Headlands -- where the road peaks and as you head down you get the most amazing view of the rolling hills of West Marin below you meeting the vast, open expanse of the Pacific Ocean (as captured here - 1, 2). Takes my breath away each and every time. Same goes for Big Sur!
posted by ericb at 1:17 PM on June 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


Since people like making youtube posts, it's hard to know what would make something link worthy and what's not unless you guys give specific guidelines.

This is a good point. I would also like guidelines as to what kinds of jokes will go over well with the chicks at my office - there seems to be no consistent standard, and sometime what I think is a real "zinger" goes over like a Lead Zeppelin. Sometimes out drinking with pals, too, it's unclear when is a good time to interject vs. letting the louder guys talk. And while you're at it, it's not always easy to predict when a new TV show or band will do well - could you cover this too? kthx.

Seriously - why is it so hard to accept that what makes a Good vs. Bad post is in large part an aesthetic choice, and will thus never be concretely defined? It has to to with what else was posted immediately before it, on MeFi and elsewhere. It has to do with how it's presented, and the actual content - not just where it's served from.
posted by freebird at 1:26 PM on June 25, 2007


myspace: the movie
posted by quonsar at 1:28 PM on June 25, 2007


Liked the post.
posted by ageispolis at 1:32 PM on June 25, 2007


The vronsky post should have been deleted too.
posted by grouse at 2:24 PM on June 25, 2007


We should vote on which posts are good enough to get on the front page, like Digg, since it works so well over there.
posted by smackfu at 2:30 PM on June 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


First we should vote on whether we should vote on which posts go to the FP.
posted by RussHy at 3:10 PM on June 25, 2007


Everybody knows that languagehat is a key member of the MeFi secret cabal.

Then where's my goddam key?
posted by languagehat at 3:22 PM on June 25, 2007


Which brings us to this issue of people jumping off of bridges. Almost always to the bay side, in full view of the city. Almost never to the Pacific side.
posted by loquacious at 12:57 PM on June 25 [+] [!]


There's no pedestrian access to the Bay Bridge, which makes jumping off it more difficult. And as for jumping off the GG bridge on the city side rather than the Pacific side - well, until very recently, there was no pedestrian access to the Pacific side. West side access is allowed only to cyclists. There was a guy who volunteered with a group I volunteer with, and last year, he stopped returning phone calls. A couple of days later, his truck was found parked at the lot on the north end of the bridge. He's never been found. He left a lot of angry people behind.

That said - I hear you about falling in love with this city. The first year I lived here, I said "I can't believe I live here!" about every ten minutes. I don't say it quite as often anymore, but I still say it more often than in anywhere else I've lived.
posted by rtha at 3:28 PM on June 25, 2007


Then where's my goddam key?

"key member", son. Check your pants. QED. Nobody said joining the cabal was consequence-free. If there was one. Which there isn't.
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:30 PM on June 25, 2007


Check your pants. QED. Nobody said joining the cabal was consequence-free.

I'm checking mine too. All I can find is this fish. Is that the key to the anticabal?
posted by grouse at 3:36 PM on June 25, 2007


It depends.
Is it a halibut? In that case, you're with quonsar's clique that does things for the halibut.
Is it tuna? In that case, you're with stavrosthewonderchickens of the sea.
Is it a mackerel? In that case, you're in the Holy Cult of dios.
Is it a mahi-mahi? In that case, you're a Double Poster.

As for me, cod is my co-pilot.
posted by wendell at 3:58 PM on June 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


I have a piranha. Oooh, make that two of them. Three? Oh shi...
posted by loquacious at 4:02 PM on June 25, 2007


You've got that all bass-ackwards, wendell.
posted by cortex (staff) at 4:03 PM on June 25, 2007


If nobody's using this thread for anything, I'd like to suggest that it seems like most AskMe posts nowadays use the [MORE INSIDE] feature, and maybe it's time to consider altering the input form to reflect this as standard rather than optional — and more to the point, cleaning some clutter by eliminating all those [MORE INSIDE] tags from AskMe's front page.
posted by cribcage at 4:13 PM on June 25, 2007


I think this post, on April 7, 2007 started the current SLYT trend by making it seem "ok." Can we give this member a time out?
posted by The Deej at 4:16 PM on June 25, 2007


I realize that jessamyn has an anti-asshat commentary policy, but in my (admittedly limited) experience here at mefi, I have come to feel that me-fites are sensitive to abbreviated call-outs, and when given a reasonable explanation (like the ones cortex provided above) for a particular deletion, are less likely to make a fuss in the grey. Just sayin'.

Can I be part of the LOLCATfish cabal?
posted by misha at 4:56 PM on June 25, 2007


I think cribcage's and The Deel's attempts to re-rail this thread into something useful is rather crappie.

Cortex, I thought you played guitar, not bass.

And I would have believed loquacious if he'd limited it to a pair of piranha.

Some MeFites respond quickly to everything that bugs them. I don't know if that means they have a shark, a triggerfish or a turbot.

Some MeFites fight roughie in an argument while others turn yellowtail. Some carp on every little thing while others flounder for the right words, and others act like they're hard of herring. And others skate on thin ice.

You may thing our moderators are swordfish, hammerheads or suckerfish, but you must admit MetaFlter is a community and we are all groupers.

And misha, you know who's in charge of the LOLcatfish clique, which is a step up from clownfish..
posted by wendell at 4:59 PM on June 25, 2007


Oh, ya. Wendell knows... I am The DEEL!!!!
posted by The Deej at 5:11 PM on June 25, 2007


Oh, I lobster, n' never flounder,
He wrapped his line around her
and they drove off in his carp;
Oh, I lobster n' never flounder—
I octopus his face in, eel only break her heart.
posted by languagehat at 5:17 PM on June 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


Is it a halibut? In that case, you're with quonsar's clique that does things for the halibut.

Or with my pet halibut, Eric.
posted by ericb at 5:23 PM on June 25, 2007


Geez, Deej, I was only two keys off. Stop carping.

MrZero has a mullet, y2karl has sole, WPW has a salmon, elwoodwiles has a pollack, and so does R.Mutt, but languagehat, he is our Captain Haddock.
posted by wendell at 5:59 PM on June 25, 2007


*jumps off bridge*
posted by vronsky at 6:31 PM on June 25, 2007


I hope we got that on film.
posted by wendell at 6:36 PM on June 25, 2007


Geez, Deej, I was only two keys off. Stop carping.

No no, I get it. In keeping with your theme, you meant The D'Eel!
posted by The Deej at 6:57 PM on June 25, 2007


I hope we got that on film.

I got it on film, but I sure as hell ain't linking to it.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 7:03 PM on June 25, 2007


There's been a lot of youtubery lately

Agreed, we probably should have removed vronsky's post too but no one really jumped on the stick and did it.

Since people like making youtube posts, it's hard to know what would make something link worthy and what's not unless you guys give specific guidelines.


Well, we're not going to. You can decide what you'd like to do about that.

There is nothing wrong with emailing the admins or taking a question to MeTa, so this method seems to work pretty well. There is no site-wide problem that I can see happening that more guidelines will fix. Some people will never read them anyhow and some people will ignore them anyhow. There is an ebb and flow here that was probably tending towards being more permissive on the YouTube posts and is now shifting towards being less permissive. That's just my gut feeling, not a policty statement. I'm sure the same will happen regarding US election posts as we draw nearer to the elections.

As long as this site is run by humans there will always be uncertainties in the moderation procedures. This is a good thing more often than it is a bad thing.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:10 PM on June 25, 2007


I checked my pants, and all I found were crabs.
I guess that means I'm in with Faris (Et tu, btw.).

Also nthing the sentiment towards the trend of very lackluster YouTube posts; however, "concrete guidelines", aka "hard and fast rules", aka "calling all rules lawyers", aka "even more bitchy MeTas," are not something MetaFilter needs.
The system works as is.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 7:42 PM on June 25, 2007


you think that was quick? i made a post that got deleted in less then five minutes. i mention that not because i want a cookie. but because when i made the post i thought i understood what the site was about. but after it was gone so quickly i made a bit more effort to understand the website and realized it was a good call. i suggest taking a look at the metafilter wiki before getting all pissy and defensive. cause it wasn't worth an fpp.

btw, what's SLYT? i googled a bit and didn't find anything.

also, how does someone find a deleted post? i was just curious for the reason (though i suspect) why my crappy one got the ax.
posted by andywolf at 8:27 PM on June 25, 2007


Worth noting that if vronsky had only included a link to the YouTube page of the guy who's been posting tons of awesome Shirley Bassey clips, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. I know, it's a trivial step to get to that page from vronsky's single video link, but it does seem to matter, if for no other reason than the fact that relatively lazy single-link video posts tend to breed too easily.

(nothing in this comment should be construed as an attack on the notion of single-link posts in general. thankee.)
posted by mediareport at 8:28 PM on June 25, 2007 [1 favorite]


SLYT=Single Latino Yuppie Trannie
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 8:30 PM on June 25, 2007


single link YouTube
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 8:31 PM on June 25, 2007


It took me, like, 20 minutes to figure out that SLYT means Sexy Live Young Teens.

You guys are sick.
posted by dirigibleman at 9:07 PM on June 25, 2007


Somebody Likes Your Teeth
posted by wendell at 9:22 PM on June 25, 2007


But cortex commented twice in MY thread and then jessamyn deleted it. I think I should get a Gold Star!
posted by davy at 9:27 PM on June 25, 2007


You know, the Nazi-face one.
posted by davy at 9:28 PM on June 25, 2007


She was just doing what had to be done. We'll always 62372 in our hearts, though. Tattooed all over 'em, even.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:55 PM on June 25, 2007


I'm looking forward to all this fishy punditry in the "water" music challenge.
posted by misha at 10:32 PM on June 25, 2007


To the contrary, Andywolf, your deleted post* was perfectly fine for Metafilter, as jessamyn's given deletion reason makes clear: posted previously, pretty awesome though.
Your only sin was being seven months too late.

*Found via deleted thread.
posted by Partial Law at 6:13 AM on June 26, 2007


If nobody's using this thread for anything, I'd like to suggest that it seems like most AskMe posts nowadays use the [MORE INSIDE] feature, and maybe it's time to consider altering the input form to reflect this as standard rather than optional

No, because there are some AskMe posts that are short enough that they don't need more inside. Also, there are already enough posts that could go entirely on the outside, but don't, apparently from the mistaken impression that they have to have more inside. Making "more inside" standard would make that even worse.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 8:08 AM on June 26, 2007


« Older Time for another Grand Rapids meetup?   |   Hello, hello... Hola! Newer »

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