Is there an echo? March 4, 2009 7:15 AM Subscribe
I assume that the 'double comment' flag is for use when someone accidentally posts their own comment twice, so how about a flag to use when someone repeats exactly what was said by a previous commenter because they didn't read the comments before their own, or when their comment shows that they didn't read (or even glance at) the link/article/question at all?
Obviously, some judgment would need to be used here, both by the flaggers and the mods - if a post consists of 20 links, it's understandable if someone doesn't read every word of every link before posting a comment, or if the thread has hundreds of comments, something might get missed something in the mad excitement to add to the conversation, but here are a couple of examples that don't really fit either of those situations-
1. In this question, I suggested that the asker use dog tie-downs embedded in concrete to hold down her kid's swingset, 8 comments later, someone else said the exact same thing in a way that kind of indicates they didn't read any of the other comments before jumping in (or maybe they just missed my comment out of the other ten or so comments?)
2. In this thread, one commenter obviously didn't look at the second of the two links and rehashed it in a 'hey I read this related story somewhere else' comment, a few comments later another poster obviously hadn't seen that comment OR the second link because he posted the same link, again.
There are other examples I've seen lately, these are just easiest for me to find at the moment because I've commented in those
threads. I don't want this to be about me - I'm not personally offended that people don't read every blessed word I write - I just think the conversation here can only improve if people are encouraged (gently) to RTFA as well as the other comments before jumping in.
Obviously, some judgment would need to be used here, both by the flaggers and the mods - if a post consists of 20 links, it's understandable if someone doesn't read every word of every link before posting a comment, or if the thread has hundreds of comments, something might get missed something in the mad excitement to add to the conversation, but here are a couple of examples that don't really fit either of those situations-
1. In this question, I suggested that the asker use dog tie-downs embedded in concrete to hold down her kid's swingset, 8 comments later, someone else said the exact same thing in a way that kind of indicates they didn't read any of the other comments before jumping in (or maybe they just missed my comment out of the other ten or so comments?)
2. In this thread, one commenter obviously didn't look at the second of the two links and rehashed it in a 'hey I read this related story somewhere else' comment, a few comments later another poster obviously hadn't seen that comment OR the second link because he posted the same link, again.
There are other examples I've seen lately, these are just easiest for me to find at the moment because I've commented in those
threads. I don't want this to be about me - I'm not personally offended that people don't read every blessed word I write - I just think the conversation here can only improve if people are encouraged (gently) to RTFA as well as the other comments before jumping in.
You assume right about the 'double comment' flag (though occasionally I notice someone assumes differently, which is always a little bit dizzying when we go to try and find the double in question).
My take on it is that it's a little obnoxious—I'd rather people read the post/question, source material, and thread prior to their arrival, yeah—but in the mild default form it's something that's just going to happen sometimes and not something we as mods are usually going to delete on that basis alone.
Being a poor/lazy reader on the blue isn't really a flaggable offense on its own; it annoys me, too, but it doesn't really go beyond anything kvetch territory unless it's maybe a specific person with a serious pattern of behavior.
In the green, it might be a little more like noise (and you can flag it as such) though, again, it's usually not something we delete just because someone provided the same answer as someone else unless there's something else going on.
(On the other hand, if it's an answer like "you should see Iron Man" and the question is "Help me find movies that feature exoskeltons, like, you know, Iron Man", we'll probably nix that as like Not Even Present Today.)
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:25 AM on March 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
My take on it is that it's a little obnoxious—I'd rather people read the post/question, source material, and thread prior to their arrival, yeah—but in the mild default form it's something that's just going to happen sometimes and not something we as mods are usually going to delete on that basis alone.
Being a poor/lazy reader on the blue isn't really a flaggable offense on its own; it annoys me, too, but it doesn't really go beyond anything kvetch territory unless it's maybe a specific person with a serious pattern of behavior.
In the green, it might be a little more like noise (and you can flag it as such) though, again, it's usually not something we delete just because someone provided the same answer as someone else unless there's something else going on.
(On the other hand, if it's an answer like "you should see Iron Man" and the question is "Help me find movies that feature exoskeltons, like, you know, Iron Man", we'll probably nix that as like Not Even Present Today.)
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:25 AM on March 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
In my opinion, cilantro is delicious. And there is an afterlife.
posted by gman at 7:27 AM on March 4, 2009 [5 favorites]
posted by gman at 7:27 AM on March 4, 2009 [5 favorites]
All this meta policing lately is driving me absolutely crazy.
I mean really, do we need to publicly ask the mods to code some mechanism into the website so that we can once and for all finally solve this awful social problem of people communicate the same thing on a post?
posted by iamkimiam at 7:31 AM on March 4, 2009 [3 favorites]
I mean really, do we need to publicly ask the mods to code some mechanism into the website so that we can once and for all finally solve this awful social problem of people communicate the same thing on a post?
posted by iamkimiam at 7:31 AM on March 4, 2009 [3 favorites]
Hey I'm not trying to be police-ey, I hate the police.(haha just kidding police! don't arrest me, thanks!) This post isn't about people who share the same opinions as other people - it's about people who don't read the questions, posted links, and other comments in threads before commenting. If people are just shouting their opinions and ideas without listening to anyone else's, well, that's not much of a community, is it?
Anyway, I agree with Cortex, he makes sense, except for that last bit about Not Even Present Today (must be a joke I don't get, happens alot).
On preview, here's a hug!
posted by cilantro at 7:40 AM on March 4, 2009
Anyway, I agree with Cortex, he makes sense, except for that last bit about Not Even Present Today (must be a joke I don't get, happens alot).
On preview, here's a hug!
posted by cilantro at 7:40 AM on March 4, 2009
Science! - are you fucking with me by doing the same thing I complained about other people doing? If so, bravo! If not, well, either way, I giggled out loud at work.
posted by cilantro at 7:42 AM on March 4, 2009
posted by cilantro at 7:42 AM on March 4, 2009
Another good example of someone not reading the full post is in this thread.
posted by burnmp3s at 7:44 AM on March 4, 2009 [7 favorites]
posted by burnmp3s at 7:44 AM on March 4, 2009 [7 favorites]
I agree with iamkimiam, but not the subsequent apology. This is a minor annoyance and not worth doing anything about.
posted by rocket88 at 7:54 AM on March 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by rocket88 at 7:54 AM on March 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
exoskeltons are tough to find;
here is a photo of the somewhat more common endoskelton.
posted by Mister_A at 8:04 AM on March 4, 2009
here is a photo of the somewhat more common endoskelton.
posted by Mister_A at 8:04 AM on March 4, 2009
Lets not do this. We can't have mods policing down to this level.
posted by Ironmouth at 8:05 AM on March 4, 2009
posted by Ironmouth at 8:05 AM on March 4, 2009
he makes sense, except for that last bit about Not Even Present Today (must be a joke I don't get, happens alot)
Sorry, that's just me being oblique. Haven't had my coffee yet. I consider an answer that does nothing more than actually blindly repeat the asker's info back to them like that sufficiently brain-dead to qualify for deletion.
People can fail to pick up on some nuance of a question; that's fine, it happens to everyone now and then, and the asker or fellow commenters will often correct it when it happens and all is well.
But if you literally did not read it and your answer is nothing but a restatement of the thing you did not read, oof. It's like you didn't even come to the thread that day. You were just running by and glanced at the initial sentence of the post and belched the first thing that came to mind into the thread as you went past.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:06 AM on March 4, 2009
Sorry, that's just me being oblique. Haven't had my coffee yet. I consider an answer that does nothing more than actually blindly repeat the asker's info back to them like that sufficiently brain-dead to qualify for deletion.
People can fail to pick up on some nuance of a question; that's fine, it happens to everyone now and then, and the asker or fellow commenters will often correct it when it happens and all is well.
But if you literally did not read it and your answer is nothing but a restatement of the thing you did not read, oof. It's like you didn't even come to the thread that day. You were just running by and glanced at the initial sentence of the post and belched the first thing that came to mind into the thread as you went past.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:06 AM on March 4, 2009
5 etiquette/policy threads in less than 24 hours, and not one good flameout. Makes me long for the bloody MeTa flameout of 1886, real pitchforks were used. None of these text based sissy-forks, and there was tar and feathers too.
posted by nola at 8:06 AM on March 4, 2009 [4 favorites]
posted by nola at 8:06 AM on March 4, 2009 [4 favorites]
cilantro: I assume that the 'double comment' flag is for use when someone accidentally posts their own comment twice, so how about a flag to use when someone repeats exactly what was said by a previous commenter because they didn't read the comments before their own, or when their comment shows that they didn't read (or even glance at) the link/article/question at all?
My take: it's a nice idea, and it does happen a lot, but I think the human error of misunderstanding or not reading closely enough, or even of not realizing someone else has just said the same thing, probably can't be eliminated; furthermore, as strange as it seems, it's a natural part of discussion, and it serves some purposes - indicating that a certain response is common, indicating that further explanation is necessary, etc. - that are subtle but important.
posted by koeselitz at 8:15 AM on March 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
My take: it's a nice idea, and it does happen a lot, but I think the human error of misunderstanding or not reading closely enough, or even of not realizing someone else has just said the same thing, probably can't be eliminated; furthermore, as strange as it seems, it's a natural part of discussion, and it serves some purposes - indicating that a certain response is common, indicating that further explanation is necessary, etc. - that are subtle but important.
posted by koeselitz at 8:15 AM on March 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
Example of people not reading the question here. And then the majority of commenters proceed to not even answer the question that was asked, instead going all "Hyuk hyuk - yeah I lived in an undergrad co-op back in the 90's" "i didn't live in one and I don't know why anybody would" which are completely not relevant to the OP asking about graduate student co-ops now at a particular geographical location.
posted by needled at 8:26 AM on March 4, 2009
posted by needled at 8:26 AM on March 4, 2009
I think we should add this flag, but it should be visible to all registered users. Then we can develop another tier of flags indicating that the double comment flag was used improperly, like so:
Choose reason to flag "double comment" flag:
-Comment restated thesis of earlier comment only to subsequently refute it
-Comment was useful in that it provided insight into issue from a different perspective, even though it presented the same conclusion
-Comment was identical to what someone else said, but Pastabagel said it this time
-The person who flagged this is a jerk
-Commenter is from Canada
posted by Mister_A at 8:27 AM on March 4, 2009 [2 favorites]
Choose reason to flag "double comment" flag:
-Comment restated thesis of earlier comment only to subsequently refute it
-Comment was useful in that it provided insight into issue from a different perspective, even though it presented the same conclusion
-Comment was identical to what someone else said, but Pastabagel said it this time
-The person who flagged this is a jerk
-Commenter is from Canada
posted by Mister_A at 8:27 AM on March 4, 2009 [2 favorites]
All this meta policing lately is driving me absolutely crazy.
I mean really, do we need to publicly ask the mods to code some mechanism into the website so that we can once and for all finally solve this awful social problem of people communicate the same thing on a post?
If they've got lots of time on their hands and are looking for a great new task, the mods can sift through very long posts, clean up the language, edit for brevity, and re-post the contribution in a sort of "Readers Digest" condensed version. Adding accompanying illustrations would increase the readability even more. And perhaps an LOLcat link. TIA!
posted by terranova at 8:30 AM on March 4, 2009
I mean really, do we need to publicly ask the mods to code some mechanism into the website so that we can once and for all finally solve this awful social problem of people communicate the same thing on a post?
If they've got lots of time on their hands and are looking for a great new task, the mods can sift through very long posts, clean up the language, edit for brevity, and re-post the contribution in a sort of "Readers Digest" condensed version. Adding accompanying illustrations would increase the readability even more. And perhaps an LOLcat link. TIA!
posted by terranova at 8:30 AM on March 4, 2009
is it time to link to this comment again? I love it so.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:35 AM on March 4, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:35 AM on March 4, 2009 [3 favorites]
The only solution is to Add. More. Functionality! Amend and append, tinker and tweak until even the most capricious of user whims is catered for automagically! In Cold Fusion to boot! Waaaaaaaah!
The day that I can uninstall my Arbitrarily Remove Vowels From Posts By Italian Metafilter Members So That The Site More Closely Resembles The First Chapter Of Catch 22 Greasemonkey script is the day I can rest easy in my bed.
posted by Jofus at 8:36 AM on March 4, 2009 [2 favorites]
The day that I can uninstall my Arbitrarily Remove Vowels From Posts By Italian Metafilter Members So That The Site More Closely Resembles The First Chapter Of Catch 22 Greasemonkey script is the day I can rest easy in my bed.
posted by Jofus at 8:36 AM on March 4, 2009 [2 favorites]
I do believe this is a suitable use for the 'Noise' flag, if it irks you that much.
posted by Happy Dave at 8:37 AM on March 4, 2009
posted by Happy Dave at 8:37 AM on March 4, 2009
YOU ARE NOT MY MODERATOR.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:43 AM on March 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:43 AM on March 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
. You were just running by and glanced at the initial sentence of the post and belched the first thing that came to mind into the thread as you went past.
Great imagery! My favorite AskMe response (and when I say favorite, I mean most irritating) is here: when I asked for UK drama suggestions and said specifically we do not like Science Fiction and the response begins "If you are into Science Fiction...."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 8:44 AM on March 4, 2009
Great imagery! My favorite AskMe response (and when I say favorite, I mean most irritating) is here: when I asked for UK drama suggestions and said specifically we do not like Science Fiction and the response begins "If you are into Science Fiction...."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 8:44 AM on March 4, 2009
Metafilter: Belching the first thing that came to mind into the thread
posted by pixlboi at 8:51 AM on March 4, 2009
posted by pixlboi at 8:51 AM on March 4, 2009
I oppose this pony request, on the iron-clad certainty that when the day comes that I find I have the definitive right answer to an AskMe--the One True Answer that will virtually end all debate on the whole Meaning of Life As We Know it, in fact--inevitably, at the moment I push the submit button, some asshole with a time machine will post it in the thread immediately above mine.
And that sucks.
posted by misha at 9:23 AM on March 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
And that sucks.
posted by misha at 9:23 AM on March 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
That reminds me, jessamyn, I've been really busy on my back-flagging project. I have flagged 897 old posts!
posted by Mister_A at 9:28 AM on March 4, 2009
posted by Mister_A at 9:28 AM on March 4, 2009
Lets not do this. We can't have mods policing down to this level.
posted by empath at 9:57 AM on March 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by empath at 9:57 AM on March 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
i just licked my monitor and it tastes like soap
posted by pyramid termite at 10:11 AM on March 4, 2009
posted by pyramid termite at 10:11 AM on March 4, 2009
This place has turned really anti-cilantrite lately...
posted by Mister_A at 10:26 AM on March 4, 2009
posted by Mister_A at 10:26 AM on March 4, 2009
In terms of people reading ask.me answers vs. not reading them and answering anyway, I tend to look at it as one of those things where the perfect is the enemy of the good.
In an ideal world, all Ask.Me answerers would carefully read the question, carefully read each previous answer, and carefully provide a thoughtful, detailed, helpful, unique response. And before posting, they'd preview to ensure that in the time it took to carefully craft their reply, nothing was posted that would render it less thoughtful, detailed, helpful or unique.
In a less than ideal world, sometimes people are trying to be helpful and they have a good answer but they don't want to or don't have time to read dozens of existing answers, and maybe yes, their answer is already covered, but if it's not, by posting it, at least it's there once, and if it's posted twice, well, then I guess the asker gets to know that at least 2 people think it's a good option for solving their problem.
This is a solution in want of a problem -- or at least, a problem that's enough of a problem to merit any kind of effort in solving it, and that has a solution that won't cause more problems than it solves.
posted by jacquilynne at 10:41 AM on March 4, 2009
In an ideal world, all Ask.Me answerers would carefully read the question, carefully read each previous answer, and carefully provide a thoughtful, detailed, helpful, unique response. And before posting, they'd preview to ensure that in the time it took to carefully craft their reply, nothing was posted that would render it less thoughtful, detailed, helpful or unique.
In a less than ideal world, sometimes people are trying to be helpful and they have a good answer but they don't want to or don't have time to read dozens of existing answers, and maybe yes, their answer is already covered, but if it's not, by posting it, at least it's there once, and if it's posted twice, well, then I guess the asker gets to know that at least 2 people think it's a good option for solving their problem.
This is a solution in want of a problem -- or at least, a problem that's enough of a problem to merit any kind of effort in solving it, and that has a solution that won't cause more problems than it solves.
posted by jacquilynne at 10:41 AM on March 4, 2009
I use the "noise" flag in the situations Cilantro seems to be discussing - doesn't that work? Or is my understanding of noise, doubles, flagging and the ever increasingly ritualistic world of preferred etiquette flawed?
posted by bunnycup at 10:57 AM on March 4, 2009
posted by bunnycup at 10:57 AM on March 4, 2009
when their comment shows that they didn't read (or even glance at) the link/article/question at all?
This is like that old canard, "Best of the Web". Neither are required to post.
posted by blue_beetle at 11:44 AM on March 4, 2009
This is like that old canard, "Best of the Web". Neither are required to post.
posted by blue_beetle at 11:44 AM on March 4, 2009
I understand how you feel, cilantro. It's really irritating when that happens. It's happened to me a lot on other boards (along with everyone else, no doubt), and it even happens here on occasion. As long as you've got an Internet that consists of people sitting in comfy chairs at their preferred locations, doing their own thing whenever they want to, you're going to get varying levels of effort from everyone involved. Remember, this isn't like speaking to a receptive audience - it's more like trying to get people's attention in a crowded, noisy room. Some people just aren't going to listen no matter what you do, and you can't force them to pay attention.
posted by Kevin Street at 1:48 PM on March 4, 2009
posted by Kevin Street at 1:48 PM on March 4, 2009
Some people just aren't going to listen no matter what you do, and you can't force them to pay attention.
Sure you can, if we provide enough flagging options to cover every possible offense.
and if we wire electroshock to their chairs, activated by said tagging
posted by davejay at 2:00 PM on March 4, 2009
Sure you can, if we provide enough flagging options to cover every possible offense.
and if we wire electroshock to their chairs, activated by said tagging
posted by davejay at 2:00 PM on March 4, 2009
I see this a lot at work.
People aren't reading our signs. What's the solution? Well, we could make another sign.
It's been a long day.
posted by box at 2:16 PM on March 4, 2009
People aren't reading our signs. What's the solution? Well, we could make another sign.
It's been a long day.
posted by box at 2:16 PM on March 4, 2009
This is a bad idea, but on the culinary front there is no such thing as too much cilantro.
posted by languagehat at 2:17 PM on March 4, 2009
posted by languagehat at 2:17 PM on March 4, 2009
If people are just shouting their opinions and ideas without listening to anyone else's, well, that's not much of a community, is it?
I don't think it's much of a community if problems are solved by more rules or infrastructure instead of just saying "btw, I think you missed the part where the poster said X" to the offender. Bit of a stretch to lump your pet peeve about poor thread reading habits into the bad-for-the -community bucket, no? I mean, it bugs me too, but can you really say that these people are being awful and shouty instead of just poor or impatient readers?
posted by oneirodynia at 2:33 PM on March 4, 2009
I don't think it's much of a community if problems are solved by more rules or infrastructure instead of just saying "btw, I think you missed the part where the poster said X" to the offender. Bit of a stretch to lump your pet peeve about poor thread reading habits into the bad-for-the -community bucket, no? I mean, it bugs me too, but can you really say that these people are being awful and shouty instead of just poor or impatient readers?
posted by oneirodynia at 2:33 PM on March 4, 2009
Boy, there sure is a real push to add SpArKlY tEcHnOlOgIeS!!! to the site. It's just not enough to talk directly to one another in a thread, no! We must favourite and flag and tag! Let's filter and edit! We must organize! We must regulate! We must use tools! Bang Rock Spark Make!
Man, there's been a lot of pony-lusting, editorializing, fisticuff bullshit in MeTa lately.
posted by five fresh fish at 4:54 PM on March 4, 2009
Man, there's been a lot of pony-lusting, editorializing, fisticuff bullshit in MeTa lately.
posted by five fresh fish at 4:54 PM on March 4, 2009
Any cilantro is too much.
I once had a burrito from an establishment called Cilantro and it made me barf.
That's sort of like belching, but in technicolor.
posted by grapefruitmoon at 5:03 PM on March 4, 2009
I once had a burrito from an establishment called Cilantro and it made me barf.
That's sort of like belching, but in technicolor.
posted by grapefruitmoon at 5:03 PM on March 4, 2009
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
On the blue it just makes you look like a chump, as can be seen in this thread where a commenter clearly didn't read the second link.
posted by Science! at 7:20 AM on March 4, 2009 [7 favorites]