When the cat's away... March 10, 2002 3:35 PM   Subscribe

I'm seriously aware that Matt is gone for the weekend, but do we have to put up with crap like this?
posted by Wulfgar! to Etiquette/Policy at 3:35 PM (71 comments total)

Non existant sexual congress with ideas that one finds distatesful, isn't a point for hamhanded comment, is it?
posted by Wulfgar! at 3:37 PM on March 10, 2002

This happened last time Matt was away. And then there were camgirls...

... can someone tell me why I suddenly feel the way I do at the pub when I've watched someone knock over someone else's pint?
posted by feelinglistless at 3:52 PM on March 10, 2002

If you want to get technical: Yes, we do have to put up with it. Only Matt can delete trolls and trollers' accounts; if he's not around, they can raise as much hell as they want. I doubt he'd delete the post itself anyway, since it's worked its way into the thread discussion by this point, but luriete's going to have some 'splaining to do pretty shortly.
posted by aaron at 4:01 PM on March 10, 2002

aaron, you're right. I apologize.
posted by Wulfgar! at 4:27 PM on March 10, 2002

The Smiting Hand of Haughey should swoop down soon enough, but that thread got out of hand long before that comment. This thread was completely ruined by people who jumped all over the PETA buzzword and refused to talk about the link with any seriousness.
posted by jpoulos at 4:36 PM on March 10, 2002

I felt a little silly `bout my masturbation joke somewhere in there.
I see I got the tone right after all.
posted by dong_resin at 4:48 PM on March 10, 2002

I don't know.. maybe she has a point. We should all fuck each other. I mean everybody.. free love, man.

posted by Hildago at 5:02 PM on March 10, 2002

luriete's simply cutting to the chase. you don't really think all the mefi sniping, carping and snarling is about anything other than foreplay, do you?
posted by quonsar at 5:47 PM on March 10, 2002

Wow, a thread about PETA that devolved into name calling. I'm shocked, shocked.
posted by euphorb at 6:03 PM on March 10, 2002

The whole thread is strange. The post itself suggests that if you are one of "the thinking," you're against PETA, then goes on to endorse its latest action, makes a broad statement obviously designed to invite derision whether it's true or not, and opened the floor for discussion. It was fated to turn almost immediately into a non-productive argument argument about a whole bunch of different subjects, and that's what happened.

That being said, I think a lot of people in what some call real life, do argue out of sexual tension, but it seems unlikely to me that that would take place here, where most of us are literally faceless.
posted by bingo at 6:10 PM on March 10, 2002

maybe she has a point. We should all fuck each other. I mean everybody.. free love, man.

If you can't be with the meat you love, love the meat you're with?
posted by kindall at 6:12 PM on March 10, 2002

The whole thread should have been shoved into the "inevitable flames" category. That's what I gathered from reading the front post, and I was vindicated upon looking into the thread. First, what bingo said; secondly, comparing meat to cigarettes in terms of healthiness is rather, um, unbased... unless there's some common knowledge there that I'm unaware of? That kind of argument, without any backing, on the front post is going to be a magnet for criticism, jokes, and trolls (on top of the magnetism that any mention of PETA garners.)
posted by mkn at 6:27 PM on March 10, 2002

If you can't be with the meat you love, love the meat you're with?

Wow. This is my new motto. (Well, it's really sharing that distinction with "touching your Gandalf," but still. Laughing my ass off.)
posted by cortex at 6:48 PM on March 10, 2002

I like meat.

Red meat, white meat, the other white meat. It's all good.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 7:10 PM on March 10, 2002

Wulfgar, are you really so fragile that you can't deal with one bitchy comment without getting all indignant about it? Who the fuck cares if Matt is here or not? You should be able to ignore someone without running to Matt for justice in either case.
posted by rodii at 7:11 PM on March 10, 2002

You know, I thought the comment was actually pretty funny.
posted by ookamaka at 7:17 PM on March 10, 2002

FWIW, "Why don't you all just fuck each other and get it over with!" is a fairly common phrase amongst my friends whenever a discussion gets too heated and shrill. Methinks it was taken much more seriously than intended.
posted by GeekAnimator at 7:20 PM on March 10, 2002

amen to that: the comment was intended to lighten the tone of the 'discussion'. Not make it worse. Or have people get really upset about the interjection itself.

Just because it had the word f-u-c-k in it does not by necessity make it a troll.
posted by zpousman at 7:29 PM on March 10, 2002

Wulfgar!, your response was far more damaging that the comment you're referring to. Suck it up. He/she was joking around.

What does suck about that thread is Evanizer and darukaru both baiting another user. Which is ironic, considered that user is often considered a troll.
posted by Doug at 8:20 PM on March 10, 2002

Parody, my man, parody. Although I do recall foldy using the dogs/vomit comparison in the past.
posted by darukaru at 8:25 PM on March 10, 2002

For some reason, if the word "fuck" is contained in a sentence, it's an automatic troll to some people regardless of the context or intent. I was watching the CBS Special 9/11 tonight with Robert DeNiro, and there were a couple points during the program where a fireman says the word fuck. It was a natural part of the dialogue to the guys. They'd just come back from Ground Zero that first day, and well it made perfect sense that they'd say that. I mean it's how they talk. They're fuckin' firefighters. They had ash and shit all over'm. If they wanna say fuck, let'm say fuck is what I say.

It wasn't censored. There was not the usual annoying beep intended by haters of the word fuck to protect the world from "the horror". Somewhere, somebody is probably still on a phone to their local CBS affiliate bitching at somebody that a fuck was allowed to be broadcast on a network station. I say fuck'm.
posted by ZachsMind at 8:32 PM on March 10, 2002

fuckin' a.
posted by quonsar at 8:41 PM on March 10, 2002

Get a grip, folks. This isn't about the word "fuck". I use it. Its about the suggestion that those of of us who disagree with each other just get over it. If that is the ultimate value, then why are we here?

And rodii, if you think I was running to Matt, then why did I point out that this shit happens when Matt is away? Think, then type. The comment was meant to derail what has become a fairly good argument. In case you have missed it, that happens alot around here, regardless of Matt's presense. Maybe I should just ignore it, but that hardly seems the norm for those who fuckin' take offense at any fuckin' thing that seems to shit on their fuckin' idea of Metafilter, now fuckin' doesn't it?

It was a stupid thing to say, and needed to be called out. If you want crap like that to interject everytime someone has a disagreement, then just say so.
posted by Wulfgar! at 8:55 PM on March 10, 2002

ok, let me straighten this out... even tho i'm a 'bozo' according to a comment from one of the peanut gallery..

everything i said before the word 'seriously' was A JOKE. that's all. sheesh.

anyway, i thought it was an interesting idea that could lead to discussion. which is what i think this site is about.

it's not my fault people turned it into a flame war. i'm not the one that pushes the 'post' button for everyone else. i did the best i could, i'm sorry some (and only some) of the people didn't.


thank god i didn't mention a pancake tax.

p.s. i wonder how many people even read the link before reacting to the post...
posted by jcterminal at 9:00 PM on March 10, 2002

A poster prone to dismissive flippancy and vulgar digressions started a MetaTalk thread decrying them.
posted by raaka at 9:19 PM on March 10, 2002

Dammit, this is not what I meant. jcterminal, I, for one, had no problem with your post. I actually thought it was a good one, though I disagree with the idea that meat eaters need to be taxed for their sins. It did lead to a discussion, if one can filter through the not so witty comments such as that "we who disagree should all fornicate".

The only reason this MeTa post is here is because I believe that assholes shooting for favor should be slammed rather than encouraged. I guess that's my bad.

and raaka, upon review, get a sense of irony, will you?
posted by Wulfgar! at 9:22 PM on March 10, 2002

First, quit moderating the thread Wulgar!. You started it, stated your point, and now it's our turn. Second, this thread was bound to happen...it's been what, a week since our last big etiquette/policy thread?

There have been far worse comments being made all weekend. This isn't about Matt. We don't need him to delete the worthless posts. We need to ignore them with consistency to set a tone. Bullshit is thrown all the time; ignore it. If it's constant and coming from a single poster, then start a thread. One off-color comment is NO REASON to "take it to MeTa".

Finally, Wulfgar!, I am directly speaking to you here. This post that you made was bothersome. It was annoying and worthless as a post. It made no point and didn't help the discussion. I didn't call you a troll or take you to MeTa. I simply took a breath and said, "fuck it."

posted by BlueTrain at 9:42 PM on March 10, 2002

Finally, Wulfgar!, I am directly speaking to you here. This post that you made was bothersome.

BlueTrain, it wasn't a post, it was a comment. Get the difference? If you found it "bothersome" then why didn't you argue it, instead of just calling it out here with no backing? Was it sarcastic? Yes it was. Did it make the point that the situation is more complex than PETA realizes? I think so. Did it purhaps make the point that the US tax situation shouldn't be responsable for the economic conditions lead by other governments? Well duh. Did you think it a troll? Then why didn't you have the guts to say so? Did it have to do with the argument at hand rather than just telling all to fuck ourselves? Yes it did. What is your agenda?

I'm not moderating this or any thread. I don't run this place. You try and state that I can't comment after bringing the issue up, even though it was innevitable? What are you smoking, and can I have some?
posted by Wulfgar! at 10:05 PM on March 10, 2002

So far you've implied that Rodii doesn't think before he posts, and that BlueTrain doesn't know the difference between a post and comment. You're grasping at straws, and I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that in the eyes of most, just digging yourself deeper in a hole. You've done worse to metatalk with this post than luriete did with her comment. Quit while you're ahead.

You should have clearly stated what your problem was with luriete's comment in the beginning. You should not be condescending or insulting to other members. This thread has been completely unproductive so far, and I think the fault lies with you, Wulfgar!...even though you've already posted to it about three thousand times.
posted by Doug at 10:19 PM on March 10, 2002

Doug, that would be the original post, and four times after. I did state my problem, as you have clearly stated (not), your problems with me. Please don't let your ignorance imply a problem with me, when it really lies with those you are sucking up to.

I was "condescending" only to those "members" who wish to ignore the facts. Got a prob with that? Guess what, asshole, I'm a "member" too. If the "eyes of most" don't see that, than please petition Matt to ban my ass. Good luck. He's smarter than you, I guarentee it.
posted by Wulfgar! at 10:33 PM on March 10, 2002

Ya know, can't the assholes here deal with an argumant without signing someone up to multiple porn lists? Jesus H fucking christ, this is stupid.
posted by Wulfgar! at 11:56 PM on March 10, 2002

"we who disagree should all fornicate".

Metafilter: Where we who disagree, should all fornicate.
posted by bingo at 12:33 AM on March 11, 2002

posted by aaron at 1:00 AM on March 11, 2002


You ain't an active member till some dipshit signs you up for a bunch of porn. Walk proudly, brother. You're doing something right.

(I didn't read the thread in question, so I don't know about the argument at hand, but the porn thing is kind of a badge of honor. It's happened to me a couple of times now.)
posted by Optamystic at 1:06 AM on March 11, 2002

"Why don't you all just fuck each other and get it over with!"

I tend to like "It's a little too early to start giving each other reach-arounds, here.", myself.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 1:29 AM on March 11, 2002

And rodii, if you think I was running to Matt, then why did I point out that this shit happens when Matt is away?

What could this be if not an implicit "Matt wouldn't approve" finger-wag?

Think, then type.

Exactly the kind of sarcastic, aggressive, confrontational flame you are beloved known for, Wulfgar, as raaka pointed out. And not half as clever as you imagine.

The comment was meant to derail what has become a fairly good argument.

How do you know what it was meant to do? As others have noted here, "Why don't you all just fuck each other and get it over with!" is a jocular way of saying "Calm down." The fact that not everyone recognizes that means that luriete failed to communicate, not that s/he was trying to "derail" anything.

In case you have missed it, that happens alot around here, regardless of Matt's presense.

No, I haven't missed it, nor have I missed the fact that you have done your share of escalating, turning civil arguments into full-on caterwauling flame fests. Pot, kettle, black. And if it happens "regardless of Matt's presence," then what's the point of dwelling on the fact that he's "away"?

Maybe I should just ignore it, but that hardly seems the norm for those who fuckin' take offense at any fuckin' thing that seems to shit on their fuckin' idea of Metafilter, now fuckin' doesn't it?

This is deeply lame. OK, you've used the word fuckin' enough that we know that it has somehow become an issue for you in this thread. Whoopee. The fact is, one poster out of many posted a one-line snark that for some reason pissed you off. This happens to many of us many times a day here. Luriete's comment was in no way remarkable, even if it was the evil act of nastiness you mistook it for. But we're supposed to stand up and salute your pissed-offness, or pissiness, here in MeTa, though quite a few of us think you're overreacting. I read the thread, and your post here, and my only response was "what the hell is he upset about that for?" Get a grip.

If you're going to start calling people on the virtual carpet and demanding they "explain themselves", you should first acquire a little reservoir of respect; if you don't have that, it just looks like a tantrum. Which, in fact, it does look like.

It was a stupid thing to say, and needed to be called out. If you want crap like that to interject everytime someone has a disagreement, then just say so.

If you want to be "called out" next time and every time you do one of your patented flip-outs, then just say so. Otherwise, take a pill, or just stop being such a sissy. It's not real life, it's MetaFilter.
posted by rodii at 5:36 AM on March 11, 2002

My husband has a favorite line for confrontational issues. It always makes me laugh. So take this in the spirit intended.

"Fuck, fight or dance, makes me no nevermind. Let's get it on."
posted by bjgeiger at 6:59 AM on March 11, 2002

Has Matt gone away, then? That's nice.
posted by ceiriog at 7:07 AM on March 11, 2002

I thought the comment in question was a joke, and in the context of that entire thread of comments, wasn't too bad. No bannings here.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 7:37 AM on March 11, 2002

You know, I thought the comment was actually pretty funny.

So did I.

I didn't find the stuff about Fold_and_mutilate funny. They have been labelled a troll, and people have asked Matt to ban them, unsuccessfully, and now it's like people try to embarrass or shame them or make metafilter intolerable for them to use.

As they are one of the people who's posts I find, even at worst, to be worthy of the time spent reading them, I'm tired of reading the constant put-downs of F&M, sometimes posted when they aren't even here. It means that new members will think it's trendy to put them down, and reminds me of the tactics of school bullies, disconcertingly so.
posted by lucien at 8:15 AM on March 11, 2002

I agree, the "foldy"-baiting is out of hand.
posted by rodii at 8:33 AM on March 11, 2002

I agree, the "foldy"-baiting is out of hand.
posted by rodii at 8:33 AM on March 11, 2002

(Hrm. Sorry.)
posted by rodii at 8:33 AM on March 11, 2002

Yeah, what is it with the porn sign-ups?
posted by rich at 11:18 AM on March 11, 2002

damnit. no one signs *me* up.
posted by jcterminal at 2:59 PM on March 11, 2002

Reap what you sow, man. fold_and_mutilate makes almost no attempt to do anything here except piss people off. And even though it's not required, I get a bit suspicious of Mefiers who put no personal information on their profile page. The usually harmless ribbing that he/she/it gets is no reason for anyone to be defending him/her/it. If foldy doesn't like her/his/its treatment around here, I think they would have made an effort to do more than periodically (and predictably) drop Agent Orange on discussions... Besides, if this individual conducts the rest of their life in the outspoken manner they conduct themself around here, I would suspect they have a pretty tough skin by now.
posted by evanizer at 3:30 PM on March 11, 2002

Incredible. Does it now count as a troll just to say "I like fold_and_mutilate"?

And as for the personal information, we've done this already.

It is not cool to defend this low-level nastiness against an individual who is never nasty to anyone.
posted by Gaz at 4:13 PM on March 11, 2002

"fold_and_mutilate makes almost no attempt to do anything here "

Not to follow the lemmings off the cliff of thread-wander here, but I disagree. I've seen some downright jocular and jovial, on-topic f_and_m comments in the last few weeks, which were particularly memorable in light of his (her) earlier...uhh...cantankerousness. But perhaps my sampling is small, as I've not been reading most threads through lately...
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:07 PM on March 11, 2002

Well, I've always liked fold - mutilate I wasn't so sure about. Now I like them both.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 5:38 PM on March 11, 2002

Foldy did make a nice comment on the World Series. As a staunch Republican I know once said upon discovering that Fidel Castro had almost played for the Washington Senators, anyone who likes baseball can't be all bad.
posted by jonmc at 5:46 PM on March 11, 2002

I've seen some downright jocular and jovial, on-topic f_and_m comments in the last few weeks, which were particularly memorable in light of his (her) earlier...uhh...cantankerousness.

This is the key. f_and_m's posting output may have improved markedly, but it's still going to take a while for everyone to notice, given his history.
posted by aaron at 6:13 PM on March 11, 2002

It's not real life, it's MetaFilter.

Another for the t shirt list.
posted by y2karl at 7:39 PM on March 11, 2002

f&m can be very very funny sometimes as well.
posted by jessamyn at 8:14 PM on March 11, 2002

I remember the scantron forms from college all had a warning on them that we would recite over and over like a good luck mantra..'Do not spindle, fold, mutilate..' etc. for six or so more vivid admonitions. I loved the spindle part, heck I've remembered that for 15 years, so I've always looked kindly on fold_and_mutilate even in his cranky moments. Do not spindle him either, I say. He's doing his part of redemption; his name shouldn't come up on every list of Mefi-evildoers.
posted by dness2 at 11:24 PM on March 11, 2002

I'll mention again: Americans over 55 would immediately recognize the "fold_and_mutilate" moniker as a joke, meaning "the urge to commit an insignificant and futile act of resistance to an anonymous machine!" The way-too-wired-and-serious younger crew is hereby referred to the Free Speech Movement: Do Not Fold, Bend, Mutilate or Spindle, or to the more accurate Cultural History of the Punch Card. (A wild and free-form public conversation like MetaFilter would have been nothing but a pipe dream [as it were] way back when during the Free Speech Movement.)
posted by sheauga at 9:33 AM on March 12, 2002

Yeah...I'm under 55 but remember a guy (Harvey Matusow?) in the punchcard era of computing who urged people to fold, spindle and mutilate...he thought IBM was evil or something.
As for fold_and_mutilate, I strongly disagree with some things he says, but I didn't mean to dogpile him in a previous MeTa thread when I commented favorably on evanizer's post in an earlier MeFi thread (not the one being discussed here...) Excuse the digressions.
posted by StOne at 1:09 PM on March 12, 2002

Man. I just don't get it. fold_and_mutilate adds so much to this community. (s)he is not even what I would call a *radical* animal rights person. This is just a person that sees hypocrisy in the world and will not go silently.

So I'm calling bullshit on the righteous right here on MeFi. Wulfgar's (to name one person as an example) comments are in every way as extreme as f_and_m's, but on the other side of the ideological spectrum. I don't see his name come up every other week as the prime troll of MeFe.

You don't see f_and_m or me asking for people to be banned, or even calling them trolls. It is passive aggressive behavior, IMHO, do do so. Dissent is good. Any attempt to push dissenters out of a forum has very serious consequences and I hope that is not news to anyone. I'm worried about threads like this -- I feel like we are starting to see some kind of groupthink dynamic developing here in MetaTalk.
posted by n9 at 3:22 PM on March 12, 2002

You ain't an active member till some dipshit signs you up for a bunch of porn. Walk proudly, brother. You're doing something right.

I just wanted to clarify. Whomever signed me up to several pornlists (if you want the names, you'll have to ask me here because I've removed my email address) did so shortly after luriete's comment. I didn't post this thread until AFTER I was already watching my Inbox fill with porn. I don't know, or care, who did it. I personally think I did a remarkable job of not exploding when it happened because my listed email was on the exchange server where I work. My job was, and possibly still is, in jeopardy. I did overreact, in calling luriete to justify his/her self, partly because I was under the impression that that person had put my livelihood on the chopping block. Somebody makes a crack about how we should just fuck, and I start receiving porn. It was a coincidence, I hope, but one that I took a little too irrationally. I apologize to luriete and to this list. If the person(s) who did think it clever to attempt to get me fired is reading this, then I invite you (with no hope you will) to announce it, so that you can be thrown the hell out the door. (And before anyone thinks I'm just idly playing the Matt card, please answer, what do you think he'd do to a spammer asshole?)

I was rather surprised at the number of people who assumed I had a puritanical motive. I may be naive about the methods in which the internet community hurts itself, but I have no illusions about what we say. I do feel that whomever was the asshole thought they were getting back at someone who would be offended by the images they were so kind to send. No, not at all, and happy to disappoint.

I considered leaving Mefi, and I'm sure that there are those who would appreciate that. I'm sorry to those, but I'm not going to let an asshole ruin my day.

I wish to publically apologize to rodii. I insulted you prematurely and harshly. I can only claim extreme defensiveness. (I have emailed him privately and I hope he understands).

As for f_and_m, I thought evanizer's rejoinder bot post to be the funniest thing I've read on MeFi to date, and I still do. If any wish to notice, amid my rather aggressive presentation, I have tried to lay off the angry troll calls of f_and_m, and just sarcastically banter with him, as all here must surely admit that he does with others (the he is an assumption). I don't care if there's any attempt to bait that person, and will, at this point, defend the baiter's rights to do it. This person has established a persona here that invites attack, so let's have at it. As for f_and_m's anonymity, I'm beginning to believe that that was wise all along.

Thanks for your time.

Upon review, n9, if you really think I'm on the other end of the spectrum of f_and_m, then I invite you to reread what I've written. I'm aggressive, yes, but I'm a moderate. I am most definately not on the other end of the ideological spectrum from that person. I just stand up to him(her). And I find it remarkably humorous that someone here is calling a BS alert on the MeFi conservative cabal (that's a joke, folks).
posted by Wulfgar! at 3:42 PM on March 12, 2002

uh, Wulf I knew you were gonna get touchy about that so I dug this one up: (it seems quite opposite f_and_m's pacifism.)

"mapalm - nice try, but wrong on all counts. I don't own a gun, I don't go to bars. What I do have is a stronger sense of self than your whining projects. You have, in several threads, promoted the idea that America deserves what transpired on 9-11-01. I've had enough, you whiney little prick. What is your self-rightious pathetic little ass gonna say if America acts with reason and strength? Absolutely nothing, because you're too terrified to face those who are willing to take a stand and say: "never again". For three days, I have watched your fear mongering and wailing at the evil this country has done. I've had enough. Any who know me know that I am a man of peace and reason. But your whimpering and snivelling has me enraged more than I can express. Hide if you wish. The rest of this nation will take action, and be judged for it. But at least we will know that we have courage in the face of your defeatist cuckoldry. I thank all powers that be, if I scare you. Maybe you'll hide in your pacifist shell and quit hassling the rest of reasonable humanity with your terror that validates Tuesday's horrible events. Don't stand for yourself, don't stand for freedom, don't stand against terror. I repeat: kiss my ass, you chickenshit. Those who wish to act don't need your reactive vomit."

Just FYI I didn't call bullshit on a "cabal," just a few folks -- and you were not one of them. You are, by your own admission, an agressive poster that has *not* been labelled a troll and your comments on a few animal rights threads were opposing f_and_m's and that is why I used you as an example. You are such a dynamo!
posted by n9 at 3:50 PM on March 12, 2002

But, to agree with you Wulf, the porn thing is pretty annoying -- I've always suspected that this forum was where the spam came from but I'm pretty sure of it now. I get about 30 a day now on my once pristine noumena9 account -- I hope that your place of work understands how these things happen... I'm a programmer by trade and used to post to usenet very frequently in the comp.lang.* tree with my work email -- and I'm sure you can see where that is leading. I think most admins know that no one signs up for porn on their office email on purpose. Out policies state that _sending_ porno material is reason for dismissal, not getting it.
posted by n9 at 3:54 PM on March 12, 2002

Wulfgar, I still owe you another email (my time has been pretty fragmented), but no apologies necessary. I think if we had known what was going on behind the scenes our (my, at least) reaction would have been altogether more sympathetic. Whoever did this to you is a total pindick. Fuck you, whoever you are.

n9, you go. I wish I could name names, but there is at least one long-time, once-admirable MeFi member who seems to have made it his personal business to shame and scold every dissenting voice into silence in the last few months. I don't know if it's leading to groupthink or building to an explosion, but christ I am tired of it, and him.
posted by rodii at 4:05 PM on March 12, 2002

n9, I was called out, though not in MeTa, for that comment. It's probably the best example you could have pulled, and I salute you. That did illustrate what you were proposing as fact.
posted by Wulfgar! at 4:26 PM on March 12, 2002

I would further contend that it is a miracle that no one has asked for your banning based on your comments on _this thread alone!_ Had f_and_m fired up a such a joke of a mis-post which is (so far):

* a post about how wrong it is that someone said something raw (but not racist or sexist) on a thread by one of the folks who does just that so very often.

* said person heavy-handedly moderates their own post throughout, throwing slag nearly as bad (or worse) than the slag they were originially complaining about...

* then flips out when people observe this behavior,

* then makes the claim that they almost quit metafilter,

* strawman-ing all the way.

I mean, this takes the cake. It has it all! If f_and_m had pulled something like this, Wulf, what would your response be?
posted by n9 at 4:36 PM on March 12, 2002

n9, without knowing all the emails passed back and forth, my banning was asked for. As for f_and_m, I have stridently called him a complete troll before, but I don't remember calling for his banishment. As for almost quiting metafilter, well hmm, my job or metafilter ... not much of a choice. Strawmaning all the way is not true, and I'm surprised that you would bring it up at this late hour of the thread. If you think you could support it, please do.

I don't understand what I've said that would inspire you to say "this takes the cake", in the face of those that have been banned or worse. Remember Private Parts? What are you getting at, n9?

If f_and_m had pulled this, I would call him on it, but the fact is, he wouldn't, precisely for the reasons that evanizer laid out in his rejoinder bot thread. Would I assume that he should be banned? That's for me to figure out. Would I call for him to be banned. That's for you to show.

PS, it really appears to me, n9, like you posted this with the hope that I would respond just to lay the blame of "moderating" one more time. No, I explained where I was coming from. If you wish to designate a bad guy in the saga of fold_and_mutilate, you'll have to look beyond me.
posted by Wulfgar! at 6:01 PM on March 12, 2002

p.p.s. I would have emailed this to you, n9, but you address doesn't appear to work. In light of recent events, I can only say, Bravo!
posted by Wulfgar! at 6:16 PM on March 12, 2002

Well, it's certainly been educational to find out what other people consider humorous and appropriate. I think it's worth reminding ourselves that women, and especially younger women, often have a lower threshold for perceiving a potential threat in sexually explicit content than fellows do. (Would anyone dare say something improper to that Afghan lady in the famous photo now that she's grown up? Not likely.) Shaking out my Big-Medusa-Hair-of-Yukky-Snakes and flashing my supermodel grin, I'd like to note that hormones are running a little high in these parts lately. It doesn't seem right for anybody to be subjected to out-of-line, ongoing harassment by e-mail as a result of participating here. There's a CyberAngels site for anyone who needs help with that sort of stuff.
posted by sheauga at 7:57 PM on March 12, 2002

I simply asked what you would say to fandm if he behaved as you are... and as far as the strawman comment well, every time (I checked) I've interacted with you you have pulled that trick, including this time. I didn't _say_ that you would ban him -- you just said I did and I didn't designate you as a "bad guy," but you said I did. You are attributing an argument to me that I didn't make and wouldn't agree with, which is the pat definition of the term.

And this whole thread does take the cake -- it has a bit of everything in it, an aleph-drama of everything that happens in metatalk including me not letting the thread die. :) And my email works just fine, thanks, I just tested it: robb@nervous.net, Robb Monn 514 3rd Ave, no, 8 NY NY 10016 if you still can't get through. Again, you're a dynamo and that is good, but I personally think you have been rather rude to others here and ill behaved which is certainly nothing that johnmc wouldn't inform you that I'm immune to being myself. I do figure I'm less touchy, however.
posted by n9 at 8:41 PM on March 12, 2002

I would like all here to know that n9's email is working now, and I apologize if I've lead any to believe otherwise.
posted by Wulfgar! at 9:05 PM on March 12, 2002

posted by Kafkaesque at 9:16 PM on March 12, 2002

Excuse me, thread, but would you mind not stabbing me in the brain like that?
posted by rodii at 9:34 PM on March 12, 2002

And the thread answers, Nevermore.
posted by Wulfgar! at 10:03 PM on March 12, 2002

« Older Mefi usage slips into the real world   |   Not moderating the thread! Newer »

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