I LOVE YOU ALL PLEASE LOVE ME TOO August 28, 2007 5:54 PM   Subscribe

How is favoriting every single comment (in several different threads) different from any other kind of crapflood? It dilutes what (arguably little) utility the favorites have for anyone else, and annoys me because I haven't had coffee yet.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken to Etiquette/Policy at 5:54 PM (251 comments total) 3 users marked this as a favorite

Yes, I know, choose one of:

a) go outside
b) flag it and move on
c) it's not hurting anybody, let booboo have his fun
d) your voice is hoarse from shouting at those kids to get off your lawn, OLD MAN
e) SH1TCOKC!!!1!

but hell, I was temporarily banned way back when for gleeful crapflooding (and it wasn't even crap, it was a funney gaem me and iceberg73 were playing), and this just seems less clever and at least equally pointless.

I'm not calling for the banhammer or anything, but just wanting to know if a) the admins and everybody else is all good with it and b) Tennyson D'San et al would knock it the hell off already.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:55 PM on August 28, 2007 [2 favorites]


Yeah, it's the sort of thing that could totally have gotten captain sockpuppet there banned about fifteen minutes ago.

Which he was; Matt might drop in with details.
posted by cortex (staff) at 5:58 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


It dilutes what (arguably little) utility the favorites have for anyone else

The only actual utility that favorites have is to serve as a bookmark for a post (or, to a lesser extent, a comment) you want to revisit later.

Anything else may be entertainment, but it sure as hell ain't utility.

That said, I suspect we will see a spate of serial favoriting of all the comments in this thread, and I'd really like to get in on the ground floor of that.
posted by dersins at 6:00 PM on August 28, 2007 [2 favorites]


Yeah, it's the sort of thing that could totally have gotten captain sockpuppet there banned about fifteen minutes ago.

Frankly, that seems pretty arbitrary, given that he'd only distributed 1500 or so "noise" favorites, rather than the 4000-odd doled out by mister "im on ur sidebar fixin ur fence."
posted by dersins at 6:04 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


annoys me because I haven't had coffee yet

So what you're saying is that favorite should be redeemable for coffee. 25 favorites for a large double-double and a toffee-glazed...
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 6:05 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


Which he was; Matt might drop in with details.

Well, there we go then.

So what you're saying is that favorites should be redeemable for coffee.

I could totally get behind that idea. Or maybe beer, depending on timezones and all that.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:06 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


As soon as you sign up they make you feel small
By giving you no time instead of it all
Till the pain is so big you feel nothing at all
A favoriting user is something to be
A favoriting user is something to be

They hurt you at home and they hit you at school
They hate you if you're clever and they despise a fool
Till you're so fucking crazy you can't follow their rules
A favoriting user is something to be
A favoriting user is something to be

When they've tortured and scared you for twenty odd weeks
You come to MeTa to fight all the freaks
When you can't really function you're so full of fear
A favoriting user is something to be
A favoriting user is something to be

Keep you doped with MeFi and MeTa and AskMe
And you think you're so clever and classless and free
But you're still fucking peasants as far as I can see
A favoriting user is something to be
A favoriting user is something to be

There's room at the top they are telling you still
But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
If you want to be like all the folks on the hill
A favoriting user is something to be
A favoriting user is something to be
A favoriting user is something to be

If you want to be a hero well just favorite me.
If you want to be a hero well just favorite me.
posted by Effigy2000 at 6:08 PM on August 28, 2007 [5 favorites]


I pick E.
posted by IronLizard at 6:09 PM on August 28, 2007


Frankly, that seems pretty arbitrary, given that he'd only distributed 1500 or so "noise" favorites, rather than the 4000-odd doled out by mister "im on ur sidebar fixin ur fence."

I tend to agree, but as far as I know davey_darling isn't a sock; a "stop freaking out" timeout for someone's spare account seems like pretty low stakes, regardless, and I was kind of expecting the topic to come up here at some point anyway.

And here we are!

So what you're saying is that favorite should be redeemable for coffee.

Best idea I've heard all day. stav is right about the beer, though—maybe we should work out some sort of Universal Beverage Unit that we can use to handle multiple drink types...
posted by cortex (staff) at 6:09 PM on August 28, 2007


I've seen a million faces
and I've rocked them all
posted by jonmc at 6:10 PM on August 28, 2007


The thing about favoriting is that it started out (for me) as a great way to keep track of things I wanted to go back to for the most part. Once I reached a certain number that became unfeasible. It was almost easier just to use the search function. Now it's just all fun and games until someone favorites your grandmother.
posted by IronLizard at 6:14 PM on August 28, 2007


Just because 1500 is less than 4000 doesn't mean it's a good number.
posted by smackfu at 6:15 PM on August 28, 2007


I am confused. Are there new rules? We've had a bunch of MeTa threads about "how much favoriting is too much?" and the answer has always been "do what you want with them; different people use them for different things". Did a favoriting limit just get introduced unannounced? How many per day are we allowed to dispense?
posted by nowonmai at 6:18 PM on August 28, 2007


Remember when favorites weren't meant to be about popularity or perceived quality, but rather were an easy, built-in bookmark system? Good times...
posted by aaronetc at 6:18 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


It dilutes what (arguably little) utility the favorites have for anyone else

What utility would that be, exactly? People use favorites in different ways. If someone wants to favorite every comment in a thread, or favorite every comment by a user, or favorite every comment on the site, why would that affect how favorites work for you?
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 6:18 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


If someone is banned for serial favoriting, does that mean we lose that favorite?!
posted by SassHat at 6:19 PM on August 28, 2007 [4 favorites]


Just because 1500 is less than 4000 doesn't mean it's a good number.

Oh, you caught me. That's exactly what I said. I'm so busted.
posted by dersins at 6:25 PM on August 28, 2007


I'm struggling to come up with the proper analogy here, but the best I can come up with is the free taste of ice cream. Yes, we'll give you a free taste of ice cream, and, yes, you can have as many as you like; but if you come in every day and ask for a taste of every single kind of ice cream without ever buying a cone of your own, we'll start thinking you're not serious about using the service for what it's intended for, and ban you from the store.
posted by yhbc at 6:28 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


Or at least not give you any more free tastes of ice cream.
posted by yhbc at 6:29 PM on August 28, 2007


why would that affect how favorites work for you?

ah, see, but that's not what this bulk fave-whoring is about... it's about the public nature of it, which is a site issue. would anyone be doing it if the number of favorites for a given comment, post or poster weren't visible? maybe, but it would probably mean they have OCD.
posted by Hat Maui at 6:32 PM on August 28, 2007


I think the problem certain individuals have with serial favorite bandits is that they're not the target. Come to think of it, neither am I. Off with their heads!

Really, I don't understand how this could be a problem. Your own favorites remain unsullied by this dirty business. If a tiny blob of text by a user name irritates you that much, I'd love to know how you survived the rest of the internet.
posted by IronLizard at 6:37 PM on August 28, 2007 [2 favorites]


No one would care about the favorites if they weren't indicated in the thread.
posted by smackfu at 6:37 PM on August 28, 2007


From his profile:

I'm proud of people who utilize metatalk to constantly improve this website and I try to demonstrate my support for them.

See, he's just showing his pride and support the only way he knows how.
posted by DanielDManiel at 6:37 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


It's not a problem so much as it is just not funny any more.
posted by yhbc at 6:39 PM on August 28, 2007 [4 favorites]


True, it was hilarious the first time (with three at once, no less) now it's just meh. I figured they would tire of it quickly enough.
posted by IronLizard at 6:41 PM on August 28, 2007


Didn't we have a thread a year ago like this? It was some kind of FireFox extension problem?
posted by daninnj at 6:41 PM on August 28, 2007


In long threads, it's nice to be able to skim through and quickly pick out comments that have been favourited a lot and are therefore likely to be worth reading. Favouriting every single comment in a thread makes this hard.
posted by Aloysius Bear at 6:43 PM on August 28, 2007


People use favorites in different ways.

Yes, precisely.

If someone wants to favorite every comment in a thread, or favorite every comment by a user, or favorite every comment on the site, why would that affect how favorites work for you?

It's not about me, despite my UNAMUSING JOKE about annoyance and caffeine withdrawal. Which is why I asked for the opinions of the userbase and the admins in my first post to the thread. Which is what Metatalk is for, no?

Since the user('s sockpuppet) has been banned, and since looking at his or her profile it seems that the only notable activity that that username has engaged in is profligate favoriting and that would therefore seem to be the reason for bannination, perhaps I'll just let the Wielder of The Banhammer give his perspective, mmkay? I've already given mine: it's crapflooding.

If a tiny blob of text by a user name irritates you that much, I'd love to know how you survived the rest of the internet.

Good job. You came up with one of the usual insulting tedious stock answers that I missed in my little list. Gold star!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:43 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]




Isn't it odd to question the existence of a thread while simultaneously linking to it?
posted by The Confessor at 6:44 PM on August 28, 2007


I'm just glad stavrosthewonderchicken said it for us. I was just about this close *shows you how close* to losing my MeTa cherry over this.
posted by nola at 6:46 PM on August 28, 2007


Y'know, if #1 changed the term "favorite" (that sweet kiss of approval) to boring ol' "bookmark" (meh, smells like work), a lot of this nonsense would just go away.

you are welcome to bookmark this comment, of course
posted by Quietgal at 6:50 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


I'm just glad stavrosthewonderchicken said it for us.

Yeah; thanks, stav. This has gotten annoying lately, because either it's a bad joke that the joker doesn't realize isn't working any more or it's a deliberate crapflood and/or personal protest against the whole "favorites" system, and who really benefits from that kind of shiite?
posted by yhbc at 7:01 PM on August 28, 2007


Anything else may be entertainment, but it sure as hell ain't utility.

Entertainment/happiness isn't utility? Someone needs to read more John Stuart Mill.
posted by blue_beetle at 7:04 PM on August 28, 2007


Good job. You came up with one of the usual insulting tedious stock answers that I missed in my little list. Gold star!

Always happy to help.

And it's the golden plus sign, not star. kthxbye
posted by IronLizard at 7:04 PM on August 28, 2007


I agree. Instead of spreading all the favorites around, we should just keep 'em concentrated in one location. I suggest that if you have anything to favorite in this thread, do it here.
posted by iamkimiam at 7:06 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


Isn't it odd to question the existence of a thread while simultaneously linking to it?

Right? Doesn't that just re-enforce it's existence? Like they say, any press is good press (or something to that effect).
posted by IronLizard at 7:07 PM on August 28, 2007


you guys are so lame
posted by Firas at 7:08 PM on August 28, 2007


It's not about me

But you could have emailed the administrators about this directly.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 7:09 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


Just out of curiosity, stavros, why do you care who favorites what?
posted by fandango_matt at 7:12 PM on August 28, 2007


But you could have emailed the administrators about this directly.

I could have, but I wanted to hear what other users thought about it as well. That is what Metatalk is for. For my part, I have a strong dislike for private back-channel communications about site policy. And when I posted this thread, I did not know the user account had already been banned.

Just out of curiosity, stavros, why do you care who favorites what?

I have explained that I think favoriting everything in multiple threads is a kind of crapflooding. I'm not sure what's unclear about that.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:17 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


Whose sockpuppet is he?


And for the record, I'm totally tasting the rich, intoxicating wine of the favorites flood right now, but this iguy is doing it wrong and it pisses me off.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 7:18 PM on August 28, 2007


And it's the golden plus sign, not star. kthxbye

Ask Stan Chin about that.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:18 PM on August 28, 2007


I don't want to speak for stav, fandango_matt, but for my part anytime someone looks to exploit a "weakness" and in this case use a site tool to spam everyone , it would seem they're on thin ice to say the least.
posted by nola at 7:18 PM on August 28, 2007


I should use that preview button.
posted by nola at 7:18 PM on August 28, 2007


Wait, I missed it- what did Tennyson D'San do that was ban worthy?
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 7:19 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


I have explained that I think favoriting everything in multiple threads is a kind of crapflooding. I'm not sure what's unclear about that.

It seems, and stop me if I'm wrong, that your post is also a criticism of favorites ("arguably little utility"). Aside from the "crapflooding", again: why do you care who favorites what?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 7:19 PM on August 28, 2007


I kinda agree with Stavros: the problem with favourites being a dual purpose thingy is that even though I know that maybe somebody is just bookmarking them, I instinctively give more attention to any comment with a favourite, and in cases like this, it is annoying.
posted by dhruva at 7:20 PM on August 28, 2007


Heh, that would be a pretty good way to spam the site.

Just register your domain as your username, and then favorite away. I wonder if anyone would even notice right away?
posted by smackfu at 7:21 PM on August 28, 2007


What's unclear is how

[1 favorite +]

is crapflooding. The text already exists, so it's not like excessive favoriting is the same thing as filling the thread with crap. And unless it's affecting the readability of MetaFilter, I don't understand why you care.
posted by fandango_matt at 7:22 PM on August 28, 2007


Ask Stan Chin about that.

Hey man, the gold stars are so last quarter. The plus is what's in now.
posted by IronLizard at 7:22 PM on August 28, 2007


Guts; because it looks like crap, it destroys any value of the system, and it's just not fucking funny any more.

WE DON'T CARE WHO FAVORITES WHAT; WE ONLY CARE WHEN ASSHOLES FAVORITE EVERY COMMENT IN A THREAD AS EITHER A JOKE OR A JAB AT WHAT THEY CONSIDER AN UNFAIR SYSTEM

Okay?
posted by yhbc at 7:22 PM on August 28, 2007


It seems, and stop me if I'm wrong, that your post is also a criticism of favorites ("arguably little utility").

I'm willing to accept that people use favorites for different reasons and in different ways. Some people may use favorites specifically to seek out the 'best' stuff, some may use them as backpats or socialization.

Aside from the "crapflooding", again: why do you care who favorites what?

I don't, for the most part, except perhaps in cases where things like unhelpful jokes in AskMe are favorited, for example, where it's destructive. But it's far from being something that gets me worked up.

I don't understand why you care.

OK.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:25 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


Shit, that's "guys", not "guts". It was meant as a non-personal address to those still expressing doubt why this is a problem.
posted by yhbc at 7:26 PM on August 28, 2007


I think its more like a library. Different people use it different ways. Some people come in every day and chose a different book, or lots of books, and read them there. Other people check books out. In the ice cream analogy, you're throwing the guy out because he's abusing the service and costing you money. Without some sort of loss - of service or of utility - there is no abuse. Favorites and Flags are not the equivalent of Merits and Demerits, although for some reason some people feel the need to have that reinforcement. But, that's easy for me to say, what with my 25% positive ratio, whatever the hell that means.

In Summary: Didn't we just have favorite-inspired drama yesterday?

There's a really easy way around this.

Also. Let's not fight. MetaFilter: Chill the Fuck Out - A Retrospective.

Full Disclosure: I have a vested interest in the favorite bookmark system staying in place. Sorry to pee in your oatmeal.
<3
posted by absalom at 7:26 PM on August 28, 2007


Just register your domain as your username, and then favorite away. I wonder if anyone would even notice right away?

Smackfu, you are an evil genius. I think that's been gone over though, the consensus that usernames like viagraboner.com would be suspicious immediately. Or really, anything with a .com after or www. before. And since the link won't actually be to the offending site anyway, gain from this would be really weak.
posted by IronLizard at 7:26 PM on August 28, 2007


where it's destructive.

To clarify, I mean 'destructive by explicitly encouraging counterproductive behaviour' not 'OMG IT'S DESTROYING METAFILTER'.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:27 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


Entertainment/happiness isn't utility? Someone needs to read more John Stuart Mill.

Just because a famous dead guy who wrote political philosophy books said something a long time ago doesn't mean it's like, true.

You know who else was a famous dead guy who wrote political philosophy books?

That's right, this guy.
posted by dersins at 7:29 PM on August 28, 2007


That said, I suspect we will see a spate of serial favoriting of all the comments in this thread, and I'd really like to get in on the ground floor of that.

Uh, me too. Although I fear I may already be to late.
posted by delmoi at 7:31 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


Wait, I missed it- what did Tennyson D'San do that was ban worthy?

Yes, please, administrators, investigate this curious comment, and take the appropriate and consistent actions. Not as punishment, but as intervention. You gotta show some compassion for how these three are expending the precious and irreplaceable minutes that make up their lives.
posted by nanojath at 7:32 PM on August 28, 2007


Okay; I also would like an explanation, or at least an opinion.
posted by yhbc at 7:37 PM on August 28, 2007


I'm still not understanding--and I hope someone can explain--how this:

posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:27 PM on August 28 [1 favorite+] [!]

is more offensive than this:

posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:27 PM on August 28 [+] [!]

I'm assuming it does, because I don't think you'd be bringing this issue to MeTa unless this egregious offense truly warranted this kind of attention. Do favorites affect the readability of MetaFilter? Or is this just a "Knock off the Farkish behavior" thing? Seriously, I'd like to know.
posted by fandango_matt at 7:37 PM on August 28, 2007


does is
posted by fandango_matt at 7:38 PM on August 28, 2007


Why not just do what seems a little obvious:

Stop calling them fucking favorites.

They're used for lots of things, like bookmarking. As previous users have mentioned, that's their only real "utility".

Some are used to remember a place in a thread. Some because you thought it was funny. Some because it actually was your "favorite" comment.

But naming them based on one of their functions seems just a touch sloppy, seeing as how it's not even the most useful one. And it seems to be bruising egos.

Why not just call them "marks".

As in, "mark this comment".

You could mark it because you like it. Or because you don't. Or because you want to remember it. Seems just a little more precise.
posted by lazaruslong at 7:38 PM on August 28, 2007


The offense may come from clicking on [1 favorite +] and finding out who is behind the favorite.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 7:39 PM on August 28, 2007


Do favorites affect the readability of MetaFilter?

Because if everything is favorited, you won't be able to tell which are the good posts without reading them.
posted by smackfu at 7:40 PM on August 28, 2007


Maybe the solution is you only get to favorite one comment or thread per day.
posted by fandango_matt at 7:42 PM on August 28, 2007


And because favoriting everything in a thread is like getting a participation ribbon. That's great for the losers, but it's not a real prize.

Because let's be honest here, favorites are the only commodity that's traded on MeFi, and no economy likes devaluation.
posted by smackfu at 7:42 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


I'm choosing option (c): I still haven't seen a cogent explanation of how this mass favoriting destroys any utility or enjoyment for anybody or abuses the system in any way. How does it hurt you, yhbc or stavros, if someone decides to indiscriminately favorite a whole pile of comments? Why on earth do you care? How is it similar to crapflooding? The closest thing to an explanation either of you has posted is "it's not funny any more". But neither is favoriting a single comment, so what's the deal?

I'm with Quietgal: change the name from "favorites" to "bookmarks" without changing any of the functionality, and all these problems go away.
posted by hattifattener at 7:44 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


It's crapflooding because we have a very useful "popular Favorites" page.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 7:44 PM on August 28, 2007 [2 favorites]


OK. Fess up. How many of you smartasses, besides me, have been tempted to favorite every comment in this thread?

*ashamedly raises hand*
posted by The Deej at 7:46 PM on August 28, 2007


I'm still not understanding--and I hope someone can explain--how this: [stav gets a fave] is more offensive than this: [stav ain't got no fave]


Not sure I saw anyone say that that is more offensive than that.
posted by carsonb at 7:48 PM on August 28, 2007


It's crapflooding because we have a very useful "popular Favorites" page.

A simple Poisson distribution would say this hypothesis is highly improbable.

The "popular favorites" page demonstrates a high threshold for popularity — indeed, at this moment, none of the posts on the popular favorites page has only one favorite.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 7:49 PM on August 28, 2007


So, did davey_darling commit himself to a mental institution after favoriting all of thepinksuperhero's posts? Someone should check up on that guy.
posted by Burhanistan at 7:49 PM on August 28, 2007


*ashamedly raises hand*


Give in to your urge. With each passing moment, you make yourself more my servant.
posted by dersins at 7:50 PM on August 28, 2007


Also, mathowie hasn't burst upon the scene as yet (wouldn't want to be there when he checks his inbox) to say that he and pb are working on upgrades for the favorites system wherein they'll be searchable and much more functional thereby obliviating any need for this squabble but I expect him to quite soon.
posted by carsonb at 7:51 PM on August 28, 2007


Yeah, offensive isn't the right word. Now maybe if people had profane stick figure usernames, it would be offensive.

2 users marked this as a favorite:
8=)
o-8-<=
posted by smackfu at 7:51 PM on August 28, 2007 [2 favorites]


carsonb:

posted by stavrosthewonderchicken It [mass favoriting] . . . annoys me because I haven't had coffee yet.
posted by fandango_matt at 7:52 PM on August 28, 2007


I'm assuming it does, because I don't think you'd be bringing this issue to MeTa unless this egregious offense truly warranted this kind of attention.


Dude.

He hasn't had his morning coffee!
posted by delmoi at 7:53 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


What's really offensive is the verbification of "favorite", a term which I just now googled.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 7:55 PM on August 28, 2007


It's crapflooding because we have a very useful "popular Favorites" page.

Useful for posts, yes. For comments, not so much. For example, Seventy of you idiots favorited this pointless, stupid, unfunny joke of mine, which now stands as the second-most favorited comment of the last seven days.

How is that useful to anything other than perpetuating my own quasi-masturbatory fantasies about finally being one of the cool kids?
posted by dersins at 7:58 PM on August 28, 2007


my own quasi-masturbatory fantasies about finally being one of the cool kids?

oh shit was that out loud?

posted by dersins at 7:59 PM on August 28, 2007


The offense may come from clicking on [1 favorite +] and finding out who is behind the favorite.

For those following along at home, Blazecock refers, of course, to my offhand throwaway mention during a disagreement (about what and when I've already forgotten, though perhaps he hasn't) that I thought I'd noticed him consistently favoriting comments (since our previous head-butting) that disagreed with me or took me to task for some reason.

He flew into what seemed to be a rage about it, and I eventually demurred after winding him up a bit, accepting that perhaps it was just confirmation bias on my part. Still, he does keep bringing it up, so one wonders.

fandango_matt, I don't know what else to say, other than that you seem to be deliberately focussing on something that is not germane, and so deliberately missing what small point I was trying to get at. Others in this thread seem to have gotten it, and explained the downside of favoriting everything in sight already. I see no need for me to repeat it.

The user account was banned, according to cortex. I infer from this that mathowie had the same feelings about this as I do. I suggest you ask him what he thinks: after all, he is the admin.

I don't demand that anyone agree with me. I was suggesting the practice as an ongoing thing was counterproductive to the site as a whole. Some in this thread agree, some don't. That's fine.

How does it hurt you, yhbc or stavros, if someone decides to indiscriminately favorite a whole pile of comments?

I implore you to read the thread. It doesn't. My suggestion was that it hurts the site by diluting the utility of the system for some users (but not all, clearly, because, again, people use the system in different ways). Does it hurt it a lot? Probably not. Is it worth people getting worked up over? Again probably not.

I thought it was worth discussing. Again, I await more admin commentary.

On preview

posted by stavrosthewonderchicken It [mass favoriting] . . . annoys me because I haven't had coffee yet.

Yes, I meant that in complete and utter seriousness.

People seem to want every Metatalk thread to be a freaking war of all against all, these days. I kinda miss the days when it was more usual to pose a question about the way the site was run, and have people talk about it, and perhaps (just perhaps) something useful might come of it.

Ah well.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:00 PM on August 28, 2007 [4 favorites]


Good show, sir.

All I can do is kick myself for rising to your bait.
posted by carsonb at 8:01 PM on August 28, 2007


71
posted by The Deej at 8:01 PM on August 28, 2007


(But perhaps I just dreamed those days of milk and honey. Kids/Lawn/etc.)
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:02 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


Seventy of you idiots favorited this pointless, stupid, unfunny joke of mine,

That was completely unfair. 12XU obviously holds important meaning to at least 71 mefites. Just because they can't agree on the exact meaning amongst each other is no cause to insult them.
posted by IronLizard at 8:05 PM on August 28, 2007


71

STOP FUCKING FAVORITING THAT FUCKING COMMENT!

IT'S NOT EVEN A GOOD JOKE!

I've made good jokes before, I swear. Good posts, too.

But do the favorites came in waves for the good jokes, the good posts?

NO, THEY DON'T!

THEY COME-- A COMBINED 228 (AND COUNTING) OF THEM-- FOR A THROWAWAY SINGLE LINK NY TIMES POST AND A JOKE THAT ISN'T FUNNY!

JESUS FUCK WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?
posted by dersins at 8:08 PM on August 28, 2007 [3 favorites]


Still, he does keep bringing it up, so one wonders.

I'm not the only one here pointing out that your seeming obsession with who-favorites-what is at issue. So you're either being genuinely clueless or disingenuous. Since you're not often clueless, this seems like a really sad display on your part.

You're better than this, stavrosthewonderchicken.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 8:10 PM on August 28, 2007


The offense may come from clicking on [1 favorite +] and finding out who is behind the favorite.

More in the same sense that in these cases, it's a letdown click which produces a meaningless data point, than in the sense that it can reveal petty grudges. Looking at who favorites a comment or what users have favorited increases some part of the community aspect of this place, by revealing some measure of personality, for example, if they're passive aggressive grudge-bearers.

And I do think the Popular favorites page's existence adds to the evidence that it's crapflooding, even if it doesn't have more effect than simple bad taste or lolpile joke favoriting, because it institutionalizes the existence of "most favorite" things, and these cases are understood not to be favorites for any reason.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 8:11 PM on August 28, 2007


So when do we get a favorite of our favorites section where we can organize our mess of bookmarks/favorites/marks/backpats or whatever? Maybe they should be categorized and we can have a little dropdown next to the comment so it's obvious why it's being marked. Or something. No wait, I like it better this way. Adds mystery.
posted by IronLizard at 8:11 PM on August 28, 2007


I'll just let the Wielder of The Banhammer give his perspective, mmkay? I've already given mine: it's crapflooding.

posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:43 PM on August 28


Did anybody else read this as "I'll shut up now"? Language is funny sometimes.

But, yeah, it is crapflooding. Burn the sockpuppet. We're expendable by design.
posted by and hosted from Uranus at 8:12 PM on August 28, 2007


How does it hurt you, yhbc or stavros, if someone decides to indiscriminately favorite a whole pile of comments?

I won't speak for my old friend stav, but I kind of use favorites to gauge how effectively I'm communicating or writing. (If someone who ordinarily dislikes me favorites something I assume I've just said something brilliant) and being favorite as part of some massive in-joke can kind of muddy the waters. Just a theory.
posted by jonmc at 8:13 PM on August 28, 2007


The thing is, even without clear apparent harm, even disregarding any concern about the "depreciation" of favorites-as-currency, even considering that the favorite system is imperfect (and something we've been talking about a little bit behind the scenes lately, oddly enough):

It's griefing. As a sudden crazy random button-pounding maneuver, it's kind of nuts, and timing out an account to cut that off while we figure out what the fuck is up isn't really that weird of a move, especially when it's a sock.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:13 PM on August 28, 2007


More in the same sense that in these cases, it's a letdown click which produces a meaningless data point, than in the sense that it can reveal petty grudges.

Then remove the option for people to view the source of other's favorites. Then there is no possibility of that kind of misinterpretation.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 8:15 PM on August 28, 2007


Hmm.
I think there is a good chance that some one will favorite every comment in this thread, just to piss off the wonder chicken.
I am only commenting in order to get that inevitable +1 favorite.

thank you for reading this.
posted by yeoz at 8:15 PM on August 28, 2007


Silly. We don't use categories any more. We use tags.

In fact, that gives me an idea. How about we just replace favorites with comment tags... then you could just tag things as "favorite" or "bookmark" or "fucking stupid", and everyone would be happy. "19 people have tagged this comment." Much better. And then when you clicked through, it would really be intereszting.
posted by smackfu at 8:16 PM on August 28, 2007


bah. and i got beaten by dersins. oh well.
posted by yeoz at 8:17 PM on August 28, 2007


won't replacing favorites with comment-tags just replace the problem with ... the exact same problem? someone marking every comment in thread with the same tag?
posted by yeoz at 8:18 PM on August 28, 2007


Silly. We don't use categories any more. We use tags.

None of that newfangled terminology. It's the same thing with a web2.0 spin.
posted by IronLizard at 8:19 PM on August 28, 2007


It started here, and this person went on a tear, favoriting 1500 things in less than 24 hours (there are only 1440 minutes in a day, so it was a lot, for a long period of time). Since it's a sockpuppet of a well-known mefi user, it seemed like a lame way to make a point by essentially crapflooding every thread they could. I pulled the posting rights for a week and emailed the person about it, but haven't heard back.

And yeah, we're working on features to make favorites a much better archive system and I would go out on a limb to say it's not impossible to imagine someday having thumbs up/down ratings for posts and comments in addition to simple favorites, because as much as I never wanted to build a +/- system, people are already using favorites for that purpose.

The way they've played out on youtube and digg seem pretty innocuous and less of a bloodsport than slashdot's rating system has always enjoyed. But it won't happen anytime soon and it's just something I'm mulling over and thinking of how it might work over the next few months, so no need to start a new thread about it or flip out if you hate the idea.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 8:21 PM on August 28, 2007


Wow, I though I was insane. That's a great rant, I have to admit.
posted by IronLizard at 8:26 PM on August 28, 2007


posted by stavrosthewonderchicken I don't know what else to say, other than that you seem to be deliberately focussing on something that is not germane, and so deliberately missing what small point I was trying to get at. Others in this thread seem to have gotten it, and explained the downside of favoriting everything in sight already. I see no need for me to repeat it.

I'm not deliberately focusing on points that aren't germane. The question with which you opened this thread asks for clarification: How is favoriting every single comment (in several different threads) different from any other kind of crapflood? Clearly, you think these two things are the same and are equally annoying and disruptive, and so I'd like to know why you think crapflooding (filling a thread full of useless garbage) is the same thing as marking every answer as a favorite.

If, as you said, it dilutes what (arguably little) utility the favorites system has, the question then becomes, "How does this affect your use of the favorites system?" These favorites aren't yours, so they don't affect you or your use of the system. Unless, of course, you want people's favorites count to be full of genuine votes, in which case you then view the favorites system as a popularity contest. Again, the question remains: why do you care who favorites what?

Personally, I think the favoriting-every-comment is a dumb gag, but aside from its mildly-retarded level of humor, I don't really care if people do it or not, but I might, if you could explain why doing so warrants a MetaTalk thread.

This is not meant to be argumentative; I'm genuinely curious.
posted by fandango_matt at 8:27 PM on August 28, 2007


SH1TCOKC!!!1!
posted by Krrrlson at 8:32 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


I suppose this is all moot, now, since Matt's confirmed that mass-favoriting = crapflooding. I had just written it off as yet another odd but mostly-harmless user tic, like y2karl's blockquoted FPPs or pyramid termite's opposition to periods. I don't think it's funny, but I don't find it particularly annoying or disruptive, although I can certainly understand how others might find it annoying and disruptive in the extreme.
posted by fandango_matt at 8:44 PM on August 28, 2007


This is not meant to be argumentative; I'm genuinely curious.
It sure made a howling mess of dersin's favorited-by-others page -- it's entirely Tennyson now.
posted by bonaldi at 8:49 PM on August 28, 2007


I'd like to say something, and I don't know if this radically drops my cred or whatever, but here it is.

Favorites are one of the top reasons I'm on MeFi in the first place, because they give me identifiable, instant, easy-to-analyze reinforcement. My identity as an individual is very tightly bound up with my ideas; so if I see my ideas being in some way praised or approved, it gives me a pretty big self-esteem boost. Just like any MMORPG, that boost and sense of accomplishment keeps me coming back.

Ultimately, favorites-as-thumbs-up is a GOOD thing, because it provides an incentive for quality posting. I have the choice to either write a two-line cryptic piece of garbage comment, or a beautiful Pastabagel-esque six-paragraph symphony. If I have no compelling reason to choose the second option, I'll choose the first, just because I'm lazy, and then I will rationalize it any number of ways. If I have the expectation that posting something well-written, intelligent, insightful, will increase some arbitrary useless number somewhere, my vanity will be a lot more powerful in convincing me to write well.

Private vices, public benefits, people! It's like the Fable of the Bees:
T'enjoy the World's Conveniencies,
Be famed in War, yet live in Ease
Without great Vices, is a vain
Eutopia seated in the Brain.
Fraud, Luxury, and Pride must live;
Whilst we the Benefits receive.
Hunger's a dreadful Plague no doubt,
Yet who digests or thrives without?
Do we not owe the Growth of Wine
To the dry, crooked, shabby Vine?
I see MeFi moving toward an E2-esque system gradually, with official levels, up- or down-votes, and C!s. Okay, maybe not. A man can dream.
posted by nasreddin at 9:08 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


I can certainly understand how others might find it annoying and disruptive in the extreme.

If you can 'certainly understand' it, then I am forced to wonder why the heck you've been hounding me all through this thread. Don't answer that, though, if you don't want to. Doesn't really matter one way or the other.

You're better than this, stavrosthewonderchicken.

I'm not sure at all what that means, but I am nonetheless compelled to agree.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:12 PM on August 28, 2007


I'm not sure at all what that means, but I am nonetheless compelled to agree.

It means your using my disagreement with you as a platform for your grudge reflects badly on you, that's what that means.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 9:18 PM on August 28, 2007


posted by stavrosthewonderchicken If you can 'certainly understand' it, then I am forced to wonder why the heck you've been hounding me all through this thread.

Because I didn't--and still do not--understand how and why you equate mass-favoriting with crapflooding. I understand that you find it annoying and disruptive, but I don't understand why such a small thing compelled you to open a MetaTalk thread, unless it's so egregiously bad that it must be addressed immediately, in which case I want to know how and why it is affecting your use of the site to warrant this urgent attention. If it's bothering you this much, you must have a damn good reason why.
posted by fandango_matt at 9:19 PM on August 28, 2007


MetaTalk: JESUS *** WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?
posted by wheelieman at 9:20 PM on August 28, 2007


Instead of favorites or bookmarks or simply marks, the little plus sign + could be called a tick. Who would want to brag about having a whole bunch of ticks?
posted by Cranberry at 9:20 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


Thanks for bringing this up, stavros. I'm glad Matt agrees that it's crapflooding, because it is. No one's yet mentioned a single good reason for someone to be favoriting everything everywhere.

Because if everything is favorited, you won't be able to tell which are the good posts without reading them.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, but favorites really are great for scrolling through threads you come to late, so you can quickly see the comments that are getting a reaction and catch up relatively efficiently. People who favorite everything indiscriminately wreck at least that utility at least partly.
posted by mediareport at 9:26 PM on August 28, 2007



Instead of favorites or bookmarks or simply marks, the little plus sign + could be called a tick. Who would want to brag about having a whole bunch of ticks?


But why? Are you so petty that you want to take away this small source of enjoyment in my drab and contemptible existence?
posted by nasreddin at 9:27 PM on August 28, 2007


It means your using my disagreement with you as a platform for your grudge reflects badly on you, that's what that means.

You brought it up first. Again. I was filling in the blanks for people who might be curious, rather than just leaving it hanging out there as (another) grudgey private-in-public dig. *shrugs*

If it's bothering you this much, you must have a damn good reason why.

It's not bothering me much at all (I didn't ban the fucker, and in fact I explicitly said I wasn't suggesting it -- since he/she was banned, I'd suggest it bothered Matt more than it did me!), and I don't need a 'damn good reason' -- I'm using Metatalk for it's intended purpose (as I've said several times already). Read what I said earlier. At this point, I'm only here because I'm wasting time fending off spitballs from the usual suspects, I think.

Because I didn't--and still do not--understand how and why you equate mass-favoriting with crapflooding.

And I don't understand how you can understand it as anything but. So we're at an impasse, I guess, eh? That's why (several times) I suggested you wait for Matt to chime in for his perspective (which, as I had suggested it might) agrees with mine. After which you immediately went 'oh well then OK fine', then turned back to started poking me with a stick.

I don't feel any great need to explain further -- I have a suspicion you're not going to make any effort to understand it anyway, given how many times it's been explained in this thread already. I don't think you want an explanation (ones have already been offered, repeatedly), I think you want an argument.

I really can't be bothered.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:30 PM on August 28, 2007


I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not

I don't remember. Let's go with "naked honesty but with the deniabilty of sarcasm".
posted by smackfu at 9:42 PM on August 28, 2007 [2 favorites]


On preview, this is a day late and dollar short, but hey, I spent five minutes on this:

I myself was all ready to make with the 'What's it to you, bucko?', but reading over stavros' comments he makes his position pretty clear. Yeah, Favorites are highly subjective in both definition and application. No, people shouldn't have to adhere to one strict use of them. Yeah, they're fairly trivial in the grand scheme of things. No, it doesn't ruin my day if MeFite X goes a little a crazy with the [+].

But blanket favoriting is similar to marking all AskMe responses as 'Best Answer', adding noise and defeating its purpose (*Cue accusations of Special Snowflakism*). Regardless of the system's irrelevance, the practice runs counter to its spirit. Is it worse than self-linking in an FPP or taking someone's e-mail from their profile page and posting it reformatted in a comment? Of course not - hell, I don't even think it's worth a banning, maybe just a request to cease and desist and a light paddlin'. But considering the system on its own terms, marking everything as a favorite is the one of the few ways it can be abused, and, like an irresponsible pet owner neglecting to pick up their dog's mess on the sidewalk, is a small but irritating thing to see.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:44 PM on August 28, 2007


You brought it up first.

Not really, though in your increasingly, annoyingly paranoid mind I suppose it must comfort you to think my every response to you is about your overreaction.

I really don't care to entertain your grudge with me, as I generally enjoy your more insightful contributions, though it's sad there is little hope that you will give any consideration to how rudely you have behaved (again).
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 9:54 PM on August 28, 2007


But why? Are you so petty that you want to take away this small source of enjoyment in my drab and contemptible existence?
posted by nasreddin at 9:27 PM on August 28


You have 442 favorites. How drab is that?
posted by Cranberry at 9:56 PM on August 28, 2007



You have 442 favorites. How drab is that?


Yay! I'm an Internet Bigshot!

*opens colt 45*
*cries*
*smokes loosey*
posted by nasreddin at 10:13 PM on August 28, 2007


BP, I have successfully been avoiding you for a good long time until this thread, because I have observed firsthand that you have a tendency to latch on and not let go until the blood flies (which is something I have been guilty of in the past, certainly, too). The only times I can recall in recent times speaking directly to you is in response to what I perceived to be you making a dig at me, and I have said nothing about you otherwise.

Let me be clear: I have no grudge against you. It is odd to me that you would even think I do. I do not hold grudges - my longterm memory is not what it used to be.

I have had far worse and more vicious arguments with a number of users of this site over the years, all of whom (that I can think of) I am quite friendly with now. In fact, I actually believe that you have some inexplicable grudge against me and are accusing me of that very thing to muddy the water, for some reason that I can't figure out.

I don't believe that I have in any way behaved rudely toward you in any way or to any degree differently than the way you have behaved towards me.

If, somehow, all this ongoing animus is somehow a serial misunderstanding, and despite the fact that I already apologized once, sincerely (to which you did not deign to respond), once again: I have nothing against you, I don't know you, I don't know what I have done other than the usual spirited to-and-fro that this site usually sees to have offended you, but I apologize. You are also a valued and usually cogent contributor to the site. Honestly, let's let it drop already.

If I'm going to argue with someone, I much prefer to argue about the matter at hand, whatever it may be, in good faith, and let bygones be bygones.

I hope that you would do the same.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:14 PM on August 28, 2007 [3 favorites]


posted by stavrosthewonderchicken And I don't understand how you can understand it as anything but. So we're at an impasse, I guess, eh? That's why (several times) I suggested you wait for Matt to chime in for his perspective (which, as I had suggested it might) agrees with mine. After which you immediately went 'oh well then OK fine', then turned back to started poking me with a stick.

No, I didn't. I said it's a moot point, since Matt determined that mass-favoriting equals crapflooding. My original and unanswered question was why you felt mass-favoriting equals crapflooding, and why mass-favoriting warranted the urgency of this thread.

I honestly am and was not trying to argue with you; I'm trying to understand your rationale since I assumed it to be more substantial than, "Mass-favoriting is annoying." But clearly that's all it is, so my apologies for pressing you to explain yourself further than you feel necessary.
posted by fandango_matt at 10:15 PM on August 28, 2007


Go nasreddin. I'm a 50Ker - favorites have been my cheat guide to how this place works. Your average rookie-level google-dump post or LOL COCKBUCKETS comment* isn't going to end up deleted or in MeTa, but it's not going to bring in the favorites either. The precious, precious favorites.

*Unless it's an exquisitely timed LOL COCKBUCKETS.
posted by ormondsacker at 10:18 PM on August 28, 2007


LOL BOCKCUCKETS
posted by brain_drain at 10:24 PM on August 28, 2007


Damn.
posted by brain_drain at 10:25 PM on August 28, 2007


OK, fandango_matt, since I'm spewing out veritable tomes in this thread, despite not wanting to:

I think you see crapflooding as something that is layout-related, visual. You have made several references to the look of things which leads to think this is how you understand the word. And that's fine, but I'm trying to use it (as others have in this thread) in a larger sense.

You also (in the comment I linked above and others, if I recall) asked why small visual changes like +2 favorites versus +3 favorites would be 'offensive'. I never used that word, nor is that in any way what I'm saying.

I'm not offended or anything: my suggestion has been that it degrades the quality of the experience by lowering the signal-to-noise ratio.

My objection to blanket faving not anything to do with the way things look, it's to the way that the system is, well, figuratively, flooded with crap. Favorites have different meanings for different people, as we've discussed at length, but there is no meaning to the favoriting when everything is favorited. It is, in effect, pure noise.

And pure noise percolates through the system in other ways -- several people in this thread have offered suggestions as to where it degrades the usefulness of various views of the data.

I am still completely at a loss as to why you would think mass favoriting (particularly if we ask ourselves what would happen to the usefulness of the favorites system for those who use it for any purpose other than just backpatting and 'I agree'-ing if more people started doing it) would be anything but noise, and how 1500 indiscrimate +faves from a single user in the course of a day would be anything but noise. The essential meaning of 'crapflood' to me is 'noise' -- not necessarily visual, thread-breaking noise.

Now, if Tennyson's spree had've been limited to one thread only, I wouldn't have bothered saying anything. But it was in at least three threads that I noticed this morning, with no indication of stopping, and no indication at that point that admin intervention was going to happen. But a limited spree is no big deal, I don't think. A quick spanking, and we're back on course.

It has always been my contention in terms of steering the good ship Metafilter that it's useful to think, when someone engages in activity that is counterproductive to the reasonably smooth operation of the place, of what would happen if more people started to do the same.

The only way -- in fact the preferred way since the site has started -- to publically discuss, evaluate and as much as is possible disseminate any agreement reached about such things has always been Metatalk. We talk about something that might be pernicious, and if enough people agree that it is, then it's less likely to happen in future without any need to make a rule forbidding anything. That's the fundamental ethos of the site, right?

why mass-favoriting warranted the urgency of this thread.

You keep suggesting urgency where I didn't feel or express any. Again, it was merely my intent to start a discussion about mass favoriting to a) get the admins' opinion and b) see what people felt about it.

That's the way this place is supposed to work, isn't it?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:36 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]


FWIW: the last part of my Large Comment there also goes a long way to explaining why I hate the 'culture of callouts', and why I don't like private backchannel policy discussions (like via email). It undermines what I believe to be the democratic ethos of the site, and what makes it special, while also tilting things towards result-focussed Moderator Opinion Veneration, rather than messy process-focussed consensus.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:41 PM on August 28, 2007


Okay, thanks for clarifying.

I think you see crapflooding as something that is layout-related, visual. You have made several references to the look of things which leads to think this is how you understand the word. And that's fine, but I'm trying to use it (as others have in this thread) in a larger sense.

Actually, I think you and I are on the same page, there. More on this in a moment.

You also (in the comment I linked above and others, if I recall) asked why small visual changes like +2 favorites versus +3 favorites would be 'offensive'. I never used that word, nor is that in any way what I'm saying. I'm not offended or anything: my suggestion has been that it degrades the quality of the experience by lowering the signal-to-noise ratio.

My use of "offensive" was perhaps a poor word choice, intended to mean "annoying/irritiating/offending", like a car alarm or a small yappy dog.

My objection to blanket faving not anything to do with the way things look, it's to the way that the system is, well, figuratively, flooded with crap. Favorites have different meanings for different people, as we've discussed at length, but there is no meaning to the favoriting when everything is favorited. It is, in effect, pure noise. And pure noise percolates through the system in other ways -- several people in this thread have offered suggestions as to where it degrades the usefulness of various views of the data.

I am still completely at a loss as to why you would think mass favoriting (particularly if we ask ourselves what would happen to the usefulness of the favorites system for those who use it for any purpose other than just backpatting and 'I agree'-ing if more people started doing it) would be anything but noise, and how 1500 indiscrimate +faves from a single user in the course of a day would be anything but noise. The essential meaning of 'crapflood' to me is 'noise' -- not necessarily visual, thread-breaking noise.


Here is the point at which you and I use and view the favoriting system differently. Whether a post or comment has been favorited has little meaning to me, unless it's a post or comment I've made. As you've correctly pointed out, favorites have different meanings for different people, but there is no meaning to the favoriting when everything is favorited. But I submit since we cannot know the reasons why people have favorited a post or a comment, favorites have little value to anyone except the person making the favorite.

Therefore, since favorites are, for the most part, meaningless and worthless to anyone but their owners, adding noise makes no difference. So unless one has the option to read only the highest-favorited posts and comments on MeatFilter, I didn't understand why anyone would care if the system was flooded with (for lack of a better word) "invalid" favorites--that is, without a gold standard, the currency is worthless, so printing counterfeits makes no difference. This is not to say I disagree with the (valid) point of blanket-favoriting degrading the usefulness of various views of the data, or that there is no meaning to the favoriting when everything is favorited.

Now, if Tennyson's spree had've been limited to one thread only, I wouldn't have bothered saying anything. But it was in at least three threads that I noticed this morning, with no indication of stopping, and no indication at that point that admin intervention was going to happen. But a limited spree is no big deal, I don't think. A quick spanking, and we're back on course.

It has always been my contention in terms of steering the good ship Metafilter that it's useful to think, when someone engages in activity that is counterproductive to the reasonably smooth operation of the place, of what would happen if more people started to do the same.

The only way -- in fact the preferred way since the site has started -- to publically discuss, evaluate and as much as is possible disseminate any agreement reached about such things has always been Metatalk. We talk about something that might be pernicious, and if enough people agree that it is, then it's less likely to happen in future without any need to make a rule forbidding anything. That's the fundamental ethos of the site, right?


Yep.

You keep suggesting urgency where I didn't feel or express any. Again, it was merely my intent to start a discussion about mass favoriting to a) get the admins' opinion and b) see what people felt about it. That's the way this place is supposed to work, isn't it?

Prior to your well-written explanation, I was interpreting your rationale as, "[Blanket-favoriting] is really annoying," hence my bewilderment at what I initially and incorrectly perceived as a curmudgeonly and poorly-considered callout.

Thanks again for clarifying.

Now, on with the campaign!
posted by fandango_matt at 11:33 PM on August 28, 2007


Huzzah!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:43 PM on August 28, 2007


I'm sorry, I just got here. Where do I pick up my coffee?
posted by jonson at 12:09 AM on August 29, 2007 [1 favorite]


since favorites are, for the most part, meaningless and worthless to anyone but their owners

this is decidedly not the case, however... several people in this thread note the usefulness of scanning for comments that have been heavily favorited, almost like cliff's notes.

same with posts -- it's easy to miss good posts due to the volume of material on this site. favorites provide a way to catch stuff you might have otherwise missed.

it's also revealing of the "site-geist," if you will, to take note of what gets favorited a lot and what doesn't.

so i'd say there are lots of reasons why the number of favorites matter to people other than the favoriter and the favoritee.
posted by Hat Maui at 12:14 AM on August 29, 2007


If I'm going to argue with someone, I much prefer to argue about the matter at hand, whatever it may be, in good faith, and let bygones be bygones.

It's not a matter for me to "let go", since I didn't bring it up — you did. But if you genuinely want to let bygones be bygones, don't bait people and then pretend to be a victim when you get called on it.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:30 AM on August 29, 2007


yhbc writes "I'm struggling to come up with the proper analogy here, but the best I can come up with is the free taste of ice cream. Yes, we'll give you a free taste of ice cream, and, yes, you can have as many as you like; but if you come in every day and ask for a taste of every single kind of ice cream without ever buying a cone of your own, we'll start thinking you're not serious about using the service for what it's intended for, and ban you from the store."

Actually it's like some ice cream truck driver started handing out free tastes to everyone in town.

smackfu writes "And because favoriting everything in a thread is like getting a participation ribbon. That's great for the losers, but it's not a real prize."

Ah so the cool kids with lots of favourites are ticked off because the nerds and fat kids are getting favourites too.

mediareport writes "I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, but favorites really are great for scrolling through threads you come to late, so you can quickly see the comments that are getting a reaction and catch up relatively efficiently. People who favorite everything indiscriminately wreck at least that utility at least partly."

You know this sounds like a really poor way of skimming a thread; essentially the epitome of what is bad with the sound bite nature of public information these days.
posted by Mitheral at 12:31 AM on August 29, 2007 [1 favorite]


But if you genuinely want to let bygones be bygones, don't bait people and then pretend to be a victim when you get called on it.

You've sure changed from your previous incarnations! (No, really! — I mean that as a compliment)





I love you guys.
posted by blasdelf at 12:39 AM on August 29, 2007


But if you genuinely want to let bygones be bygones, don't bait people and then pretend to be a victim when you get called on it.

You know, I really really wanted to let this go, and I'm going to say this not to try and carry on this pointless sniping, but, like I said about the 'misunderstanding' thing, that is precisely what I believe you have been doing.

Now, where does that get us? You think I'm doing it, I think you're doing it, and neither of us, apparently, thinks we're doing it.

So just stopping seems wise.

One more thing, though, because. I tried like hell to be as clear and as unequivocally unfighty as I could upthread. No hidden barbs, no sarcasm or last jabs in.

When someone apologizes for misunderstanding, in good faith, even when they feel (correctly or not) that they are the one that has been wronged, just in order to put an end to things, the civilized thing is not to get another kick in, but to accept their apology with grace, and perhaps even to reciprocate. Unless, as it begins to seem after two olive branches proferred by me, one ignored and the second responded to with this (mild) venom, you prefer to keep pissing at one another from a distance.

I don't, personally. But I'm certainly not feeling the love at the moment.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 1:29 AM on August 29, 2007


Except for blasdelf, of course.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 1:30 AM on August 29, 2007


perhaps even to reciprocate

I don't see much reason to apologize to someone who keeps coming at me without cause. I've done nothing to you.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:58 AM on August 29, 2007


OK, go fuck yourself. I give up.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:02 AM on August 29, 2007 [6 favorites]


And you show your true colors.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:07 AM on August 29, 2007


Hey, I tried, and tried, and tried again. You don't want to stop goading me while I try to make nice, that's fine, I can live with it. I'm not going to try any more. There's only so much patience anyone can be expected to have.

So, yeah: you can go fuck yourself.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:12 AM on August 29, 2007


I'm not rising to your bait.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:16 AM on August 29, 2007


So I clicked on my profile the today. Wow I have a shitload of new favorites. My output to favorite ratio is above 100%! Take that Pastabagel!

Oh wait, every single new favorite was done by Tennyson D'San. I feel dirty.
posted by afu at 2:18 AM on August 29, 2007


I just spent the last 15 minutes reading this thread when I could have been sleeping.
posted by item at 2:20 AM on August 29, 2007


I'm not rising to your bait.

Yes you are.
posted by item at 2:22 AM on August 29, 2007


Yes you are.

You're right, of course. My sincere apologies to everyone else for letting him get to me.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:29 AM on August 29, 2007


*head explodes*

Good god, you are pure evil, but you are an absolute master at the turnabout game. I bow to your skill and your gall.

While BP is apologizing, let me just ask anyone reading this in future to please read through what we've said to one another in this thread, then read through the thread I mentioned before, and judge for yourselves what's going on.

If I am in the wrong somehow -- if my olive branch offer and then my anger that it was ignored and ridiculed actually was somehow interpretable as 'bait' -- even if I have withdrawn my apology to Mr Pileon, who prefers to keep the animus going, I do apologize also for repeatedly shitting things up with this stupid handbag swinging that we keep getting into.

I suppose and hope it might be at least mildly entertaining.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:49 AM on August 29, 2007


A favoriting user is something to be

...sung to the tune of In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida, of course.
posted by SteveInMaine at 3:27 AM on August 29, 2007


i just like to say


RIN DIK, MORTAR FORKERS
posted by quonsar at 4:09 AM on August 29, 2007


Is Tennyson D'San loquacious? It sounds like loquacious.
posted by Kwine at 5:43 AM on August 29, 2007


And you show your true colors.

Jesus, does anyone who know BP have an explanation for the shit he's pulling here? Is it werewolf time or something? Because he's either being a total dick or making a really unfunny extended joke, and I'm...

Ah, fuck it. Never mind.
posted by mediareport at 5:51 AM on August 29, 2007


SHITCOCK PILEON
posted by Armitage Shanks at 5:58 AM on August 29, 2007


Paging Tehloki to the gray courtesy phone.
posted by BrotherCaine at 6:11 AM on August 29, 2007 [1 favorite]


Blazecock Pileon, I think it would be a good idea if you apologized for your behavior here. Remember when we all agreed we would try to be nice to one another?
posted by Meatbomb at 6:31 AM on August 29, 2007


Favorites as currency?! Devaluation?!

LOL

It identifies which comments are worth reading? What? I didn't know quality and popularity were synonymous. Some of the most informative, well thought out comments get zero or one favorites. I never thought it was a big deal. But I would hate for some of the posters, who invest the time and energy in writing long, fleshed out comments like Ethereal Bligh, grumblebee, smedleyman and mdn, to quit because they aren't being validated with enough favorites.

Please Matt, go ahead and install some sort of up/down rating system. That way we can track everybody's level of "approval". Do include some sort of feature like favorites for those of us who mostly use it as a bookmark.
posted by BigSky at 6:35 AM on August 29, 2007 [1 favorite]


"Make today your Brand New Day!TM"
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 6:36 AM on August 29, 2007


Please note that my favorite if Big Sky's comment is not a bookmark. It is an indication of agreement. It applies to the first three paragraphs. I do not agree with the fourth paragraph, but strength of my agreement with the previous three is enough to override the deficiencies of the last.

Note also that I will be spelling out the reasoning behind each of my favorites in this manner in the future. It is not an attempt to undermine the system. It just how it has to be, ...apparently.

posted by and hosted from Uranus at 6:46 AM on August 29, 2007


Blazecock Reynolds is just pissed because his habit of passive-aggressive favouriting of comments that attack his enemies is in jeopardy.
posted by Krrrlson at 7:24 AM on August 29, 2007


I have a sharp cleaver, should anyone wish to lop off his or her own hand.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 7:29 AM on August 29, 2007 [1 favorite]


Hey, Messieurs Pileon and WonderChicken? What you're doing here is starting to resemble some sort of odd grudgy jerking-each-other-off. Please drop it. Sheesh.
posted by desuetude at 7:39 AM on August 29, 2007


BP, you often contribute insightful posts, and I have enjoyed your contributions in the past. Not so in this thread. The chicken bent over backwards (now there's an image) to appease you, and nothing seemed to work.

Take a breath, re-read the thread, and perhaps you will gain a new perspective. Please at least make the effort. This public conflict is making me, at least, really uncomfortable.
posted by misha at 7:49 AM on August 29, 2007


BAN ALEX PILEON!

UNBAN D'SAN!
posted by quonsar at 8:28 AM on August 29, 2007


Blazecock Reynolds

BAN ALEX PILEON!

krrrrrrrrrrrrrrrlson and Quonsar, now you guys are just baiting him for the sake of being dicks.

Why? So he can react to your dickishness and "prove you right" somehow? What's the point?
posted by dersins at 9:14 AM on August 29, 2007


I'm late to this and I usually wouldn't bother adding anything,, but I haven't seen anyone post this, so let me just mention that that the main reason I despise the use of mass-favoriting is that it fucks up the threads in which it occurs. The previously-linked "By Request" thread now has 328 posts. As far as I can tell (though there is no way I'm going to read it) 90% of those are noise -- people jumping into the thread posting crap (often literal nonsense, in fact) in hopes of cashing in on the rule that everything in the thread gets a favorite. Ooooh! A free favorite!

If it were my thread I'd be pissed as hell, and if I were interested in the discussion going on (which I was, briefly, before it turned to shit about 20 comments in with "12XU" (which should NOT be read as a casting blame on dersins -- it's not his fault)) and suddenly the thread turned into a crap fest. If you wanted to read the substance of that thread now you'd have to wade through 328 posts to find maybe 50 (tops) that are actually on topic. I know it doesn't happen often, but when it does it severely degrades the quality of the site.
posted by The Bellman at 9:18 AM on August 29, 2007


I got lost in my parentheses there, sorry. For the first "and" in the second paragraph, read "or" and it sort of makes sense, but you get the idea.
posted by The Bellman at 9:20 AM on August 29, 2007


people jumping into the thread posting crap (often literal nonsense, in fact) in hopes of cashing in on the rule that everything in the thread gets a favorite. Ooooh! A free favorite!

YES. All the whoring and begging and hinting for favorites is annoying as hell.
posted by iconomy at 10:04 AM on August 29, 2007


If people were doing it in the blue or green, it would be unacceptably annoying. But in the gray? Land of the whine and home of the snark? It pretty much just blends in with the rest of the background noise.
posted by dersins at 10:12 AM on August 29, 2007


Yeah, you're not eating here... you wouldn't eat here... you'd never eat here anyway!
posted by breezeway at 10:55 AM on August 29, 2007


you guys are just baiting him for the sake of being dicks.

I was merely pointing out a longstanding cowardly practice by a certain someone with regard to favourites, which are, last I checked, at the center of this discussion.
posted by Krrrlson at 11:20 AM on August 29, 2007


Krrrlson, I don't believe you're actually that stupid, but I'll explain it to you anyway:

1) dersins was referring to your use of BP's real name, not debating your "point" such as it was.

2) This thread is about favoriting every comment in a thread and/or every comment by a user. It has nothing to do with your "point" such as it was.
posted by and hosted from Uranus at 11:33 AM on August 29, 2007


It's been said before, but cowardice is really about Krrrlson following users around and harassing them with his anonymous account. That's cool, though, it's just Chinatown.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:35 AM on August 29, 2007


I'm late to this and I usually wouldn't bother adding anything,, but I haven't seen anyone post this, so let me just mention that that the main reason I despise the use of mass-favoriting is that it fucks up the threads in which it occurs. The previously-linked "By Request" thread now has 328 posts. As far as I can tell (though there is no way I'm going to read it) 90% of those are noise -- people jumping into the thread posting crap (often literal nonsense, in fact) in hopes of cashing in on the rule that everything in the thread gets a favorite. Ooooh! A free favorite!

If it were my thread I'd be pissed as hell, and if I were interested in the discussion going on (which I was, briefly, before it turned to shit about 20 comments in with "12XU" (which should NOT be read as a casting blame on dersins -- it's not his fault)) and suddenly the thread turned into a crap fest. If you wanted to read the substance of that thread now you'd have to wade through 328 posts to find maybe 50 (tops) that are actually on topic. I know it doesn't happen often, but when it does it severely degrades the quality of the site.


If you're that interested in a discussion of NewsFilter and US politics on MetaFilter, why not go read one of the 5,287 other MetaTalk threads discussing those issues?

In this case, the "noise" was an improvement over the "signal"?
posted by timeistight at 11:37 AM on August 29, 2007


Favorite whoring is the new IMG tag. You say you hate it, but you'll miss it when it's gone.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 11:44 AM on August 29, 2007 [1 favorite]


Does everybody have an updated sockpuppet reference guide I don't know about?
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 12:00 PM on August 29, 2007


Does everybody have an updated sockpuppet reference guide I don't know about?

Yes.

And we're keeping it that way.

Sorry, them's the breaks.
posted by dersins at 12:04 PM on August 29, 2007


There's just two of us here, AV. You and me. Everybody else is just me. And you might be me, too, now that I think about it. I just can't remember, anymore. That's what makes the favorites and flamewars so amusing. To me. Did I mention that it's all about me?
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:44 PM on August 29, 2007


And here I thought it was all about those delicious sundaes.
posted by breezeway at 2:28 PM on August 29, 2007


you guys are just baiting him for the sake of being dicks.

I was merely pointing out a longstanding cowardly practice by a certain someone with regard to favourites, which are, last I checked, at the center of this discussion.
posted by Krrrlson at 2:20 PM on August 29


i was just baiting him for the sake of being a dick.
posted by quonsar at 2:49 PM on August 29, 2007 [2 favorites]


Blazecock Reynolds

Oh, shit. I forgot that part. Jesus, stavros, my hat's *really* off to you now for going the extra mile when Alex/Blazecock was on one of his lunatic grudge runs. You deserve a medal for your patience in this thread.
posted by mediareport at 3:19 PM on August 29, 2007


I cannot register my dismay at the thought of the addition of a +/- system.

One Man's Opinion: As much as we like to felate each other about being the web's smartest readers. . . wait, shit, that was Plastic With all the scorekeeping, grudgebearing, dick swinging, and dramatics around here, I sort of forgot. Still, an informal straw poll conducted by my reading of site proves that we think all think we're brighter than those assholes at fark imdb somethingawful boingboing. The reason MeFi still has insightful commentary (try reading a non Newsfilter thread occasionally) is because there is incentive to discuss. At least, when I just sat outside the MeFi gated community with my alms cup, I still read the comments page on almost every post. Because there was something worth reading. What if someone's excellent post doesn't get the favorites it deserves? Hell, that's still better than having well written, unpopular views voted down the memoryhole. Maybe when it was closed, there was less sense of "audience"?

Anyway, this has gotten way more rambly than I intended. Please, no. No. NO. Ratings system. Please.

just change the god damn name
beats his drum
posted by absalom at 3:36 PM on August 29, 2007 [1 favorite]


Fellate has two "L"s, and I wouldn't nitpick normally, but it's almost my favorite word.
posted by BrotherCaine at 4:37 PM on August 29, 2007


Really? I typed it in that way in google to check and it didn't yell at me. I am shamed.
posted by absalom at 5:35 PM on August 29, 2007


. . . by my continuing presence in this thread.
posted by absalom at 5:35 PM on August 29, 2007


People who favorite everything indiscriminately wreck at least that utility at least partly.

Well, yeah, but so do people who favorite things because there's something in it they want to check out later, or something (better than just bookmarking the link itself (especially when there are multiple links) because if you just bookmark it, sometimes you, or more precisely I, forget what the context was and why I wanted to go back and read it). Or who use it for anything other than saying, "great comment!".

Is it antisocial to use favorites for something other than showing approval, just because a lot of people assume that favorites=approval?

Plus, maybe someone really does think every comment in a thread is awesome, and they want them all on their favorites page--just so. So I sort of wonder where the line is there. 1504 all at once is pretty wtf, yeah. But does this mean there's an official stance on what we're allowed to favorite comments for?
posted by Many bubbles at 6:15 PM on August 29, 2007


favorites=approval

I think most people recognize that favorites=interest, of which approval is a subset.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 6:18 PM on August 29, 2007


dersins was referring to your use of BP's real name, not debating your "point" such as it was.

You mean his original username, hardly a secret or an invasion of privacy. Your prior comment already shows your endorsement of sockpuppets, since you appear to be one yourself (whose?). Personally, I see nothing wrong with keeping track of who is who. If it were discouraged, dhoyt would still be with us, and I don't recall anyone complaining about his outing.

This thread is about favoriting every comment in a thread and/or every comment by a user. It has nothing to do with your "point" such as it was.

I don't believe you're actually that stupid, so I know you can see the link quite well. Evidently you are just here to defend your hero. My advice is to choose your heroes more wisely.
posted by Krrrlson at 7:59 PM on August 29, 2007


Is it antisocial to use favorites for something other than showing approval

Of course not, and I know that using favorites as a shorthand way to browse a thread is imperfect. But we were talking about folks who favorite something *for no reason at all.* Come on, this isn't hard. Those people are shitting in threads.
posted by mediareport at 8:00 PM on August 29, 2007


folks who favorite something

By which I mean, "folks who favorite everything in a thread indiscriminately just to be cute."
posted by mediareport at 8:01 PM on August 29, 2007


But does this mean there's an official stance on what we're allowed to favorite comments for?

I'd say this means there's an official stance that four-digit point-making favorite streaks are pretty much off the table. But that's really, you know, it, at the moment.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:23 PM on August 29, 2007


Your prior comment already shows your endorsement of sockpuppets, since you appear to be one yourself (whose?).

Whose sockpuppet are you, Mr. Anonymous Troll?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 8:28 PM on August 29, 2007


You're a douchebag because you're asleep and just acting out on your faulty conditioning.
posted by Burhanistan at 8:32 PM on August 29, 2007


Fucking trolls... It never ends.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 8:48 PM on August 29, 2007


Not even a pretense of discussion any more after only 191 comments? You guys are slipping.
posted by IronLizard at 8:52 PM on August 29, 2007


You're a douchebag because you're asleep and just acting out on your faulty conditioning.

I keep reading that as faulty air conditioning. It makes me sad for whomever it's directed towards, and also their a/c, for being abused by a vengeful somnambulist.

And you're slipping, IronLizard!
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 8:59 PM on August 29, 2007


I live on a slippery slope, whaddya expect?
posted by IronLizard at 10:11 PM on August 29, 2007


See, when Jesus got up on his crucifix they stabbed his ass to make sure he was dead.
posted by puke & cry at 10:50 PM on August 29, 2007


stav, I hope this teaches you never to try to help. I can't believe you fell for the BP judo.
posted by yerfatma at 4:22 AM on August 30, 2007


I don't believe you're actually that stupid, so I know you can see the link quite well.

Sure, I can see a link, but you claimed that "a longstanding cowardly practice" was "at the center of this discussion". That's completely inaccurate, and I believe you are only bringing it up the "practice" to stir the shit.

As far as sock puppets, I didn't mean you were invading BP's privacy. You invoked 'Reynolds' in memoriam of a horse so dead that even the maggots that ate it are maggot food now. Again, see shit stirring above.
posted by and hosted from Uranus at 7:10 AM on August 30, 2007


BRING DOWN THE HAMMER
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:55 AM on August 30, 2007


I can't believe you fell for the BP judo.

I can't believe people are falling for stavros's bullshit — but, hey, whatever. A mob wouldn't be a mob, if it ever cared to fact check.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 9:02 AM on August 30, 2007


BP, by any reasonable account you're a good guy, and I like you. It seems like you really were kind of refusing to allow for the possibility that you were wrong or being a jerk above, and it read to me like stavros was genuinely trying to make peace, and I hate mob antics. Take that for what you will, but I think you're kind of stepping in it in this case, irrespective of after-the-fact Krrrlsonian antics.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:11 AM on August 30, 2007


BRING DOWN THE HAMMER

...ON THIS THREAD
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 9:14 AM on August 30, 2007


What cortex said.

Also IRFH.
posted by languagehat at 10:26 AM on August 30, 2007


what cortex said. BP, this does not become you.
posted by Hat Maui at 10:32 AM on August 30, 2007


on preview, what languagehat said about cortex's sayin'.
posted by Hat Maui at 10:32 AM on August 30, 2007


I have been pre-viewing the comments following this one, and I completely disagree.
posted by Catfry at 11:16 AM on August 30, 2007


I'm going to have to agree with what Catfry said.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 11:19 AM on August 30, 2007


Me, I'm going with: what ThePinkSuperhero said.
posted by desuetude at 11:47 AM on August 30, 2007


It seems like you really were kind of refusing to allow for the possibility that you were wrong or being a jerk above, and it read to me like stavros was genuinely trying to make peace, and I hate mob antics.

Cortex, I respect you, but I did nothing wrong here.

While what I should have done was just ignore his bullshit antics, like his attempt to "make peace" here, he chose to bring his grudge into this thread and I bit the hook.

Mob mentalities being what they are, the usual parasite shows up. But hey, whatever, that's Metatalk.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:05 PM on August 30, 2007


I'd like to hear from Sideshow Mel.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 12:07 PM on August 30, 2007


BP, it's pretty clear that he was reading you as having brought the grudge in, here. He might have been reading you completely wrong, in which case I can understand you being annoyed at him bringing it up. But then, your next heated comment toward him is this, which seems to have nothing to do with the issue tied into that previous comment, which is as far as I can tell the only real issue that would make sense as a personal affront. So from there, I get a whiplash feeling like maybe the heat between you here is coming from a misunderstanding about who was pissed off about what.

Following on a ways after that, stavros makes what looks to me like an excruciatingly, tongue-biting polite apology for any harm (perceived or otherwise) done to you, and you reply by complaining about his "bullshit antics" instead of sucking it up and acknowledging anything like the possibility of co-error in communication and maybe apologizing as well for your half of a kind of ugly argument. Which sucks, and doesn't make any sense to me, and I have zero motive to think ill of either of you and am only writing this up out of a quiet hope that maybe you'll see where the hell I'm coming from in being dismayed at all this. It's an exhausting thing to watch unfold.
posted by cortex (staff) at 12:33 PM on August 30, 2007


(And please note that I use "the grudge" as a handy figurative reference; I have no idea what personal history you two have, and it doesn't sound like stavros does either, so I'm not presuming there is or should be any such thing in actual concrete fact. Just trying to follow along with the narrative.)
posted by cortex (staff) at 12:38 PM on August 30, 2007


Is it impossible for me to understand why "winding people up" or "tearing them down" or whatever prolonged personal attacks might be called, are fun? I would love an attempt at explanation.

It's weird for me to find I don't care for this stuff, but I don't want to be a pansy: Before Metatalk, I thought I was pretty mean, arrogant and argumentative.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 12:50 PM on August 30, 2007


Well, Ambrosia Voyeur, for what it's worth, I still think you're a horrible person.
posted by Atom Eyes at 2:55 PM on August 30, 2007


Before Metatalk, I thought I was pretty mean, arrogant and argumentative.

Welcome to the high minor leagues. The winding up is like a Code Red from A Few Good Men: it's one attempt at bringing bad actors back within community norms. It's never been a nice way of operating, but it used to be effective. Without an Ethernet-enabled sock full of soap, it's a bit of a miss online.
posted by yerfatma at 3:53 PM on August 30, 2007


Thank you for summarizing what I've been trying to say, cortex. That's pretty much the way I see what's happened. I don't like this petty grudgewar any more than you do, but it seems like I don't have much of a choice.

Once again, rather than take what I believe to be unfair accusations that I've been 'bullshit'ing at face value, I ask that, if people are trying to figure out what's going on and who is goading whom, they just read what's been said.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:37 PM on August 30, 2007


I think most people recognize that favorites=interest, of which approval is a subset.

Yeah, I think you're right.

I'd say this means there's an official stance that four-digit point-making favorite streaks are pretty much off the table. But that's really, you know, it, at the moment.

*nod* It was just... I dunno, vaguely discomfiting. I guess there's not really a slipperly slope to worry about here, though.
posted by Many bubbles at 5:46 PM on August 30, 2007


(Not that anybody should care about any of it, but I feel like there's some deliberate attempted character assassination going on from my self-appointed adversary, and that makes me resentful and unhappy.)
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:48 PM on August 30, 2007


And, even though it shouldn't be necessary: all of my apologies and attempts to make peace with BP were entirely sincere and in good faith and extremely humiliating to do, because I feel like I've been the one who's been the target of a continuing grudge (the very thing that BP accuses me of doing, which honestly puts me into a mental spin) and don't feel that I have anything to apologize for other than harsh words spoken and my side of what I thought might be mutual misunderstanding rather than deliberate maliciousness.

I was and am sincere. The difference now is that I've given up on trying to make peace, because I'm getting the impression that BP is not the kind of person who will ever just shake hands and let things go.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:58 PM on August 30, 2007


Well, the guy's user name is pretty much synonymous with 'one man flame war'.
posted by IronLizard at 6:45 PM on August 30, 2007


Ho'oponopono
posted by Burhanistan at 7:02 PM on August 30, 2007


Once again, rather than take what I believe to be unfair accusations that I've been 'bullshit'ing at face value, I ask that, if people are trying to figure out what's going on and who is goading whom, they just read what's been said.

I hope so, too.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 9:48 PM on August 30, 2007 [1 favorite]


Yes, indeed. I thought that +fave was self-referentially ironic and funny. Even more so now, don't you think? Especially since it points to the pattern of grudge-comment behaviour that you've been so vehemently denying.

Give it up, man. For christ's sake.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:55 PM on August 30, 2007


(I shouldn't be surprised that you didn't get or appreciate the joke, though. Silly me.)
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:57 PM on August 30, 2007


Sometimes people play games and they don't realize they're playing them.
posted by Burhanistan at 9:59 PM on August 30, 2007


(Well, yeah, but I also wanted to bookmark that comment, as a memory aid to times BP had made snide remarks referring to our past arguments for no good reason. It was pretty clear he was going to keep it up (and he came through again in this thread, of course). Funny thing is, I'd totally forgotten about the favorite until now... it is kind of on-topic, though. People really do use favorites for different things!)
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:11 PM on August 30, 2007


I thought that +fave was self-referentially ironic and funny.

Odd, since I was answering someone else's question, and my comment had nothing at all to do with you.

I ignored your attempt to provoke a response then. My mistake was to take the bait this time around, for which I am very apologetic.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:17 PM on August 30, 2007


Is this it?
posted by Burhanistan at 10:20 PM on August 30, 2007


I ignored your attempt to provoke a response then.

Let's see: you were trying with that comment to get a rise out of me, or at least to insult me. You didn't get a response, although I did favorite it (something only you would notice and care about, probably) as a nod and a wink that I understood what you were doing (and so I could find it later).

This you attempt to reverse into me baiting you. It's bewildering to me -- it is bizarroland backwards again, my dear friend, in the same funhouse-mirror way that you've been pointing the quivering j'accuse finger at me all through this long, tedious argument.

I am very apologetic.

Good! We're both apologetic to everyone except each other! Each other, we loathe with abandon, and wish terrible awful things upon, because we both know the Internet Is Serious Business.

We plan to go to our graves bearing grudges against one another, like withered old ladies who stopped talking to their sisters decades ago because of some barely remembered trivial disagreement over doilies.

We will just keep sniping at one another long past the point where we remember what it's about, and long long past the point where anyone gives a goddamn anymore. An idiot war of verbal attrition.

Because we just just can't let the other guy have the last word.

Hell, yeah! I'm up for that! I'll totally outlast you, you big dingleberry!

Burhanistan: you're being a bit gnomic, but if that's meant to refer to me, well, I'm not passive-aggressive, I'm aggressive-aggressive.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:36 PM on August 30, 2007


Part of what makes metafilter so great is that it's simple. We're not flashy. Our logo is badly kerned. Our colors clash. We don't have an up/down rating system like Digg. Teh is spelled "the" and [this is good] does not apply. We don't have tags. Or sets. Or folders. Or top 8.

We accept this. We choose to be a part of this. We embrace it. Because in it's non-flashyness, we LOVE it. It's our secret. Our little community, our blog. And as such, we create our brand identity, not in our slick layout and convenient features, but in our user created content, consisting of in-jokes, memes, favorites, and personalities.

When things aren't polished, the rules aren't established, and there's huge room for interpretation (a room that hosts 50,000+ of us) there is bound to be somebody that takes advantage of the situation. Again and again. And there are also those who will suggest improvements. And rightly so.

But unfortunately, those improvements need to be weighed and considered carefully. Because each improvement has the potential of bringing along a hidden detriment.

I think that fucking with the favorites feature (changing the name and/or adding complexity) is a good example of this. It is its simplicity, vagueness, and positive connotation that currently creates (what I feel is) a perfect balance of usefulness and joy to the site, while remaining simplistic and understated. In it's current state, favorites can be whatever each user wants it to be. There's built in ease of use. I can come to metafilter and favorite something (for whatever damn reason I want) and I don't have to explain why, I don't have to categorize it, I don't have to navigate to/away from anything. And conversely, when someone favorites me, I can choose to interpret their reasons for doing so however I want. I can read into it as much or as little as I want to. And it's not intrusive in any way. You just don't get that on most other sites (Flickr is similar to Metafilter in the favoriting feature, and it does feel good to get a favorite, but Flickr lacks the tight community feel and rough-around-the-edges format that Metafilter has).

But every once in a while, because there isn't built-in complexity and regulation, somebody is bound to abuse this. It will happen again. We make an example and move on. The frustration we feel, and the desire to do something about it and/or make changes, is a result of the inevitable drawbacks of such a simple system. If we accept this the same way we accept the things we love about this site (also born of the same trait), it will be much easier to let it go.

In summary, Metafilter is perfect the way it is. Don't change a thing. Please.
posted by iamkimiam at 10:48 PM on August 30, 2007


Actually, we have tags and say [this is good] on a fairly regular basis. But I dig it, man.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:56 PM on August 30, 2007


as a memory aid to times BP had made snide remarks referring to our past arguments for no good reason... Let's see: you were trying with that comment to get a rise out of me, or at least to insult me.

Look: My comment wasn't directed at you in any way, nor did it refer to your past dickish behavior. Your attempt to recast my comment as some sort of attack on you is, in light of your behavior in this and previous threads, either deluded or dishonest.

No matter. Frankly, at that time I didn't give a damn about you or your grudge, and that's why I ignored your attempt to provoke a response then. Which is something I should have done here.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:59 PM on August 30, 2007


Well, that last sentence is true, at least! We're making progress, folks!

So, like thousands of words ago, when I said that I thought you were doing something that you thought I was doing, but neither of us actually thought we were doing it (which you ignored): that's still where we stand?

Maybe not so much progress, after all.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:06 PM on August 30, 2007


stavros:Naw I was poking fun at the other guy, but it was rather gnomic. Maybe someone with better cartoon drawing skills than me could whip out a quick image of a pile of flaming phalluses squaring off with a caped chicken. Bonus points if a joke linking cocks and chickens can be worked in. But at any rate, it's clear that BP is seeing things here through damaged eyes so it's best to leave it all alone. Of course, it's none of my damn business anyways so I'll bugger off as well.
posted by Burhanistan at 11:12 PM on August 30, 2007


Stop saying "serial favoriting." I am a serial favouritist. Tennyson D'san and his like are like those guys who strap themselves to a bomb and jump on a crowded bus.

Full of favorites.

Yeah, the analogy sort of breaks down there.
posted by tehloki at 11:22 PM on August 30, 2007


So I'm ready to hop in and give my pov. I've read it.

Stav, stop getting your hands dirty on this troll gone sniveller. He's a human echo chamber, and you've proved yourself an admirably decent guy. Me? I'm just a noob who reads, and honestly would rather not see the feet of clay on you old-timers.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 11:36 PM on August 30, 2007


Stop saying "serial favoriting."

Agreed. There's a subtle but important distinction between serial favoriting and mass favoriting.
posted by dersins at 12:11 AM on August 31, 2007


That's not nice, AV. Blazecock Pileon is generally a fine MeFite, but when he feels offended he bites back (as do many of us); it's sad that he's refusing to believe that stavros is sincere (which is apparent to pretty much everybody else), but it doesn't make him a troll. Don't add to the miasma that's making this thread so depressing.
posted by languagehat at 7:03 AM on August 31, 2007


it's sad that he's refusing to believe that stavros is sincere (which is apparent to pretty much everybody else), but it doesn't make him a troll

No, that he seems entirely sincere is the worst part. stav, there's no winning for losing here.
posted by yerfatma at 8:15 AM on August 31, 2007


past dickish behavior

See, that's the issue right there. This isn't a new sentiment by any stretch of the imagination, but we have to let things go. While arguments can be a good, clean, fun I realized a few weeks ago that the petty shit that I was participating in was seriously impairing my enjoyment of the site. I backed off of MeTa for a while, read some Cormac McCarthy and Gilbert Hernandez, and I've been enjoying the site a lot more than I did a month ago. My upthread mention of BND was sincere - regardless of what you've felt about MeFite X, or what he's said, at some point you've got to give them the benefit of the doubt... and if you can't do that, just don't respond. If MeFite X is being a douche, you don't have to defend yourself - their jerkiness will be obvious to anyone with some sense, and odds are it'll be his rep that will be diminished, not yours. This isn't high school, this isn't Sparta*. Folks don't have to be BFF with everyone on the site, and as long as there are people there will be disagreements and arguments, but there is no reason for engaging in these never-ending vendettas when we're all here for the same reason.

*Great, now I have Talking Heads stuck in my head.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 8:21 AM on August 31, 2007 [1 favorite]


languagehat: I think you're right, but I'm not really using reputations or history to judge (being rather confused at the outset, myself, having generally thought of both as pretty cool members), just this conversation, as directed to do by both participants. Based on those constraints, these are my conclusions.

Don't want to be spot-judged by bystanders? Do this stuff in email.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 8:23 AM on August 31, 2007


Metafilter: ain't no foolin' around
posted by yerfatma at 10:31 AM on August 31, 2007 [1 favorite]


Metafilter: ain't no foolin' around

Also, ain't no party, ain't no disco.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 10:54 AM on August 31, 2007


I'd like a Classic GrillBurger™ with Cheese, hold the drama, and a Dilly® Bar, please.
posted by breezeway at 11:41 AM on August 31, 2007


Well, this was fun.

He said, ironically.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:01 AM on September 1, 2007


LABOR DAY WEEKEND WOO

*taps keg, burns white clothing*
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:13 AM on September 1, 2007


Next time, don't stand so close to the cross.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 11:30 AM on September 1, 2007 [1 favorite]


Hey, it's not my fault. Some jerk lit it up early.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:47 AM on September 1, 2007 [2 favorites]


Well done, sir.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:09 PM on September 1, 2007


On second thought: medium rare. And throw on some mushrooms and blue cheeze.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:10 PM on September 1, 2007


cheeze is like cheese+. Heavy on the rennet. Just to enhance the cruelty and promote global warming. 'Cause fuck the planet. Earth had its chance. Now is the time of the return to darkness. Yummo.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:35 PM on September 1, 2007


I sincerely miss
Those heavy rennet yummos
posted by cortex (staff) at 12:49 PM on September 1, 2007


« Older Where in the world are all these people?!   |   Why can't one favorite deleted threads? Newer »

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