Macho bullshit posturing derails a thread. January 29, 2002 11:35 AM   Subscribe

Macho bullshit posturing derails a thread. I'd expect this kind of rubbish on kiddie forums, not MeFi. Yes an apology was made for the derailing, but what was the point of the comment?
posted by jackiemcghee to MetaFilter-Related at 11:35 AM (56 comments total)

I think it was a good comment in light of the post, which was about childish drivers overreacting to anyone on the road who impedes their progress.

He was, you know, representing.
posted by swift at 11:41 AM on January 29, 2002


God forbid someone tell a story from their experience that is pertinent to the post. Can't have that sort of thing happening around here...
posted by revbrian at 11:42 AM on January 29, 2002


My point was to relate an experience I had that struck me as appropriate given the topic. Something to stimulate discussion. People have chimed in on ideas to help cars and bikes get along better (including some by Yours Truly), and relating other experiences, and attacking others.

Did I miss something in the charter?

Ed
Your Macho Bullshit Posture Boy since 2002.

posted by ebarker at 11:46 AM on January 29, 2002


I rather liked the post. In fact, I'd like to see the poster elaborate on that event Fray style. People make mistakes.
posted by machaus at 11:48 AM on January 29, 2002


Worst. Metalk. Post. Ever.
posted by skallas at 11:48 AM on January 29, 2002


I loved Ed's story and the discussion that followed it. On the other hand, I also loved jackiemcghee's comment in that thread. Love is all around!
posted by rodii at 11:50 AM on January 29, 2002


"Has anyone here been on either end of this?"

I guess you should just answer yes or no.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 11:51 AM on January 29, 2002


I'm not sure I agree with what ebarker did in Atlanta (hell -- he regrets doing it), but I'll defend his right to add his comment to the post. It added to the thread.

If you don't like someone's opinion -- fine. But don't bring them into MeTa because of it.

I suspect jackiemcghee is upset that everyone concentrated on ebarker's comment after he contributed. But ebarker was the only one who could provide insight from the other side of the coin, which is what the post asked for. ("Has anyone here been on either end of this?")
posted by jennak at 11:59 AM on January 29, 2002


Personally, I like personal accounts in comments if they pertain to the FPP--and ebarker's did.

There was this one time I was posting in MetaTalk and I thought I'd make a joke by writing a personal account of a time I was posting in MetaTalk. Well, I wrote the little paragraph down and thought it was mildly amusing and then I hit 'Preview.'

In the second paragraph I didn't really add to the story but I felt like it at least needed an ending.
posted by perplexed at 12:07 PM on January 29, 2002


jennak: Contrary to the opinion of some, I'm not seeking approval for what I did, simply trying to lay facts out as I recall them from an almost-6-year-old episode. Respectful dissent is a fine thing.

I am also amused, and somewhat saddened for the MetaFilter community as a whole that my post, which wasn't attacking anyone, caused some personal attacks lobbied in my general direction.
posted by ebarker at 12:07 PM on January 29, 2002


Oh, I forgot to sign it...

Ed
Your Macho Bullshit Posture Boy since 2002.


(all in good-natured fun)
posted by ebarker at 12:09 PM on January 29, 2002


Amen, skallas. The reason ebarker's comment dominated the thread is because it's relevant and interesting -- how many people have actually gotten into a roadside fistfight? Trying to make this a MetaFilter etiquette issue because he isn't sufficiently contrite about his actions six years ago is colossally lame.

Especially since he's contrite about his actions six years ago.

Sheesh.
posted by rcade at 12:26 PM on January 29, 2002


jeez, maybe all that "oooh, the mefi cops are thought police" bullshit has some truth to it.

When I saw the post (for the record, I hate the abbreviation FPP, I don't know why and can't explain it, but there you go, I will never use it), with the question "who has been on either end of this" I laughed to myself thinking "yeah, right! like anyone that threw a bottle at someone on the road would a) actually exist among the mefi membership or b) want to tell everyone about it." I figured there wouldn't be anyone on that side of the fence, but I appreciated that someone tried to get that side.

ebarker's post was fine, and in line with exactly what the post asked for, and I'm saying this a person that rides a bike in traffic and has almost gotten killed dozens of times through no fault of my own (personally, I'd never run up to someones car and provoke them, I'd call 911 if I was injured or angry about a gross wrongdoing). It was a strong post, and I could see how it could derail a thread by people that take bike safety seriously.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 12:39 PM on January 29, 2002


I hate the abbreviation FPP

Well, it was fun while it lasted.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 12:57 PM on January 29, 2002


I know why I hate it now, it's a pointless abbreviation. simply saying "thread" or "post" is what I've done in the past, and it's not much shorter to say FPP, but it confuses more people, and makes the community look more insular, as they come up with their own code names for things (I would say "MeFi" was one I also didn't like at first, but it was obvious enough that people understood what it meant at first glance)
posted by mathowie (staff) at 1:08 PM on January 29, 2002


Yeah, ever notice how "www" takes longer to say than "world wide web"?
posted by jennak at 1:29 PM on January 29, 2002


jennak: I think the point is that www is easier to type than world wide web. Just as FPP is easier to type than Front Page Post. Of course, where else do you post things but the front page?
posted by eyeballkid at 1:46 PM on January 29, 2002


I too hate "FPP" and have wondered how it appeared out of nowhere and took over the way it did. Back to whatever cult thread spawned you, cursed initialism!
posted by rodii at 1:47 PM on January 29, 2002


FPP differentiates between the blue and the grey.
posted by NortonDC at 1:58 PM on January 29, 2002


Well, now this thread has been hijacked over a discussion on the merits (and demerits) of the abbreviation FPP.

I know I'm pissed.
posted by rocketman at 2:18 PM on January 29, 2002


Yeah, ever notice how "www" takes longer to say than "world wide web"?

My mental speech homonculous pronounces this as "wuh-wuh-wuh."
posted by Skot at 2:20 PM on January 29, 2002


It's funny that ebarker's post, which is completely on topic, gets called out, while this crap is ignored.
posted by Doug at 2:24 PM on January 29, 2002


I always think "wubble-wubble-wubble". Sad.
posted by walrus at 2:25 PM on January 29, 2002


In my mind, 'www' always comes out 'dubdubdub'. Equally sad.
posted by kokogiak at 2:39 PM on January 29, 2002


Doug, that DD guy is in the penalty box now. He won't be posting until he agrees to tone it way down.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:55 PM on January 29, 2002


Clearly Matt is not down with FPP.
posted by kirkaracha at 2:58 PM on January 29, 2002


I thought Front page post was distinct from thread because sometimes a link or comment is appropriate *inside* a thread, but not as a post on the front page.
posted by rebeccablood at 3:34 PM on January 29, 2002


but how often do people have to make that distinction? I see FPP used in place of simply "post" or "thread" more often than not.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 3:36 PM on January 29, 2002


I started typing 'FPP' because all the cool people were doing it.
Now I feel all icky and confused.
posted by dong_resin at 4:04 PM on January 29, 2002


FPP isn't bad. It's FFP that confuses me.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 4:15 PM on January 29, 2002


My mental speech homonculous pronounces this as "wuh-wuh-wuh."

Say it as "wub," please! I'd love this pronunciation, which is common in some parts, to become standard.
posted by redfoxtail at 4:22 PM on January 29, 2002


How phildickian.
posted by rodii at 4:51 PM on January 29, 2002


FPP isn't bad. It's FFP that confuses me.
It's short for ffefpttam, I believe.
posted by j.edwards at 4:54 PM on January 29, 2002


jeez, maybe all that "oooh, the mefi cops are thought police" bullshit has some truth to it.

I must agree that this post and a few recently have a "You don't agree with my liberal/PC point of view and Metafilter is a 'liberal' site, so you're out of line" vibe going. Chill, baby.
posted by owillis at 4:59 PM on January 29, 2002


re: www. Isn't it surprising that this convention has hung around? It's not necessary to URLs, right? Why not something like web.cnn.com or whatever?

Maybe "www" in spoken English has become a code word for "I am talking about a web address." The radio announcer says "more information at www.cnn.com" rather than "more information on the web at the address cnn.com." In that way, "www" might really be shorthand, even though it sounds like an annoying mouthful.

Sorry for the hijack.
posted by Mid at 5:09 PM on January 29, 2002


www is faster if you pronounce it "wuh wuh wuh."
posted by MegoSteve at 6:01 PM on January 29, 2002


Tri-dub. Then it sounds like some kind of secret fraternity/sorority thing.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 6:14 PM on January 29, 2002


Regardless of any random abbreviations that might be the new focus of this thread... I'm sorry for the argument that ensued between myself and a few other members of the community. Bike safety and driver awareness of bikes are topics close to my heart.
David Dark and I have resolved our differences over email which should warm everyone's cockles.
posted by TiggleTaggleTiger at 6:15 PM on January 29, 2002


i am down for the tri-dub sororiety parties.
posted by moz at 6:25 PM on January 29, 2002


I too apologize for my part in the argument and for generally being quick to start arguments or jump into insult-trading banter with other users in threads.

I have sworn to do better in the future. (thanks, matt for your gentle reminder)
posted by David Dark at 6:27 PM on January 29, 2002


Group hug!
posted by rodii at 6:59 PM on January 29, 2002


rodii: Who can turn the world on with a smile?

Well, it's you girl, and you should know it....

wait, you dropped your hat.

Only slightly confused,

Ed
Your Macho Bullshit Poster Boy since 2002.
posted by ebarker at 7:34 PM on January 29, 2002


I love the FPP abbreviation.

Well, not really love it, but. How does one differentiate between a post inline to a thread and a post on the front page, I ask you? There are different rules and stuff required depending on what 'sort' of post it is. In one case, a self-link, for example, is punishable by stoning, while in the other, it's just jim-dandy if germane. And so on.

Thus, 'Front Page Posts' and 'Comment Posts'. (I just made the second one up.)

It seems a lot less unwieldy to refer to Front Page Posts with FPP, in my humble. It's not a code.

My tongue is lodged in my cheek, to a degree, if that's not apparent, but I am half-serious too. It's a useful abbreviation, naturally-arrived-at, and unless someone can suggest something better, I say keep it.


posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:05 PM on January 29, 2002


(I flung my hat.)
posted by rodii at 8:05 PM on January 29, 2002


Why anyone with a twenty-three-letter nickname would go to the trouble to acronymize or abbreviate anything is beyond me.

(Jab, jab, hook, feint....)


posted by mr_crash_davis at 8:40 PM on January 29, 2002


Gotta save time somewhere.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:46 PM on January 29, 2002


FPP is unnecessary, where else would a post be? Mefi post, metatalk post. A post and a comment are two different things and sometimes a comment is called a post. A post is a post. I think.
posted by chrismc at 8:56 PM on January 29, 2002


How does one differentiate between a post inline to a thread and a post on the front page, I ask you?

Expanding/clarifying chrismc's remarks: The former is a post; the latter is a comment.
posted by redfoxtail at 9:13 PM on January 29, 2002


You got your post in my comment!

I for one hate the word "comment." But whaddaya gonna do?
posted by D at 9:21 PM on January 29, 2002


Fair enough. I just didn't think it fit. I'm not asking for his castration.
posted by jackiemcghee at 10:38 PM on January 29, 2002


Now that things are calmer, I have a request of the men here: Please, don't put girls (and women) down as a way of insulting your fellow males.
posted by Carol Anne at 5:13 AM on January 30, 2002


Carol Anne: But it's fun, and fits the situation.

Now pardon me whilst I go rub some soothing ointment on my knuckles. Sore from scraping the ground, y'know. The tongue planted firmly in my cheek isn't helping, I keep biting it. Ow.

Ed
Your Macho Bullshit Posture Boy since 2002.
also recently uncastrated.


posted by ebarker at 7:28 AM on January 30, 2002


> The former is a post; the latter is a comment.

Yes but... the slashdot "first post" nonsense betrays some confusion here, no? (Not that I disagree with the separation; it's quite logical. However, I often find "posted in that thread" will roll off the tongue, moreso than "commented on that post," for whatever reason.)

And now back to the tuff-boy action.
posted by D at 11:02 AM on January 30, 2002


Carol Anne: That was in response to this.

Do you find one more offensive than the other, and if so, why?
posted by David Dark at 12:37 PM on January 30, 2002


David Dark: I'm not interested in debating the relative offensiveness of those comments. I just wish men wouldn't insult girls and women, when sniping at others of the male sex.
posted by Carol Anne at 6:25 PM on January 30, 2002


The old David Dark would have said:

I'm not interested in debating the relative offensiveness of those comments, either. I just asked for your opinion. But I'll grant your wish anyway, and us men will henceforth only insult girls and women when speaking directly to them.

But the new improved David Dark says:

Fair enough.

But let me say first that I don't think about gender much when I'm on MeFi, because in a forum such as this, sex is irrelevant. This place is where equal rights live, because when ideas reach me, I don't know the gender, race, or sexual preference of the thinker until they tell me or I figure it out.

Of course, if a person has a gender specific name like yours or mine, I know immediately the sex of the individual who's comment I'm reading... or do I? I suppose one can never tell... even accepted stereotypical gender roles could be impersonated by a bored second-rate actor, but I consider most Mefi users to genuinely be what they purport to be. Regardless, I don't consider it important when debating ideas.

With a non gender specific name, such as yarf's, I do usually get a sense over time of whether the user has masculine or feminine personality traits, but I haven't had much experience encountering yarf here and at the time of this exchange, I assumed yarf was a girl (I checked yarf's profile after I read your comment, and there's nothing there, either). You're probably right, of course; yarf probably is a guy, and the later comment of "I doubt my response would've been to get out of my car and kick his ass" leans toward masculinity, in that it does leave open the possibility that yarf might get out of the car and kick his ass, which is something my girlfriend might do but most women probably shy away from.

Maybe you know that yarf is a guy, or maybe it's obvious in another thread, but I took "Oh, wow, what a man you are..." to be a joust at men as being testosterone-filled idiots who get into fist fights and try to kill each other like barbarians. I assumed that a comment with that tone was coming from a woman. That may have been a sexist thought, and if so, I'm guilty. But when I replied with, "Oh, wow, what a girl you are," I was trying to say, "Yes, I'm a man, you're not, so what?"

Before I said this, I tried to make an appropriate response to yarf's comment while making my previous opinions clearer. I thought yarf was overreacting and taking the argument to the extreme while the example remained one of marginal consequence. Regardless of how angry a person gets or how justified that anger is, I don't think we want a society of people who run around banging on the windows of all the people at whom they're angry.

I also believe that if someone threatens you and/or your property in a hostile manner, you have the right to defend yourself and/or said property. Not with deadly force, mind you, but enough force to let the someone know that his or her actions are unacceptable and will not be tolerated. It's possible that the biker in this instance even thinks twice now before he hops off his bike and starts pounding on cars, swearing at drivers, and threatening to kick people's asses.

I tried to say it in the most direct way possible, using the least amount of words that I could in order to say what I wanted to say because I absolutely hate long posts on Mefi.

Now, that being said, let's begin discussion of what we really came here to talk about before Doug calls off-topic crap again and I get banned...

I agree with skallas.
posted by David Dark at 2:03 AM on January 31, 2002


« Older I saw it on Fark but want to discuss with MeFites   |   Chairman MaOwie Newer »

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