sort comments by number of favorites? July 2, 2011 7:10 PM Subscribe
The title kind of says it all.
Maybe this has been proposed before. I would search for it, but it would be kind of hard to separate the noise from the signal.
Anyway, for some posts, reading the comments in chronological order isn't necessary. Often, I'm just interested in what the most favorited comments are. It would be more efficient to be able to sort comments by number of favorites than browsing.
Maybe this has been proposed before. I would search for it, but it would be kind of hard to separate the noise from the signal.
Anyway, for some posts, reading the comments in chronological order isn't necessary. Often, I'm just interested in what the most favorited comments are. It would be more efficient to be able to sort comments by number of favorites than browsing.
There's a bookmarklet, but the consensus on adding it as an official feature has been a resounding no.
posted by donnagirl at 7:18 PM on July 2, 2011
posted by donnagirl at 7:18 PM on July 2, 2011
I understand but what you are asking is contrary to MeFi culture.
You are supposed to read all comments to be able to participate.
Here at least, the number of favorites is more decorative than valuable.
posted by bru at 7:19 PM on July 2, 2011 [5 favorites]
You are supposed to read all comments to be able to participate.
Here at least, the number of favorites is more decorative than valuable.
posted by bru at 7:19 PM on July 2, 2011 [5 favorites]
adding this sort to the site proper would over-emphasize the value of favorites.
Basically this. While it's fine if people want to find ways to do this using scripts or whatever, this is not going to become part of the way the site works.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:24 PM on July 2, 2011 [2 favorites]
Basically this. While it's fine if people want to find ways to do this using scripts or whatever, this is not going to become part of the way the site works.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:24 PM on July 2, 2011 [2 favorites]
What everybody else said.
I would strongly encourage anyone to use these kinds of tools, but, when they do, I would prefer they didn't also comment on these threads they're reading.
This is just my personal preference. Like how sometimes I like to skim things. Not milk.
posted by box at 7:26 PM on July 2, 2011 [5 favorites]
I would strongly encourage anyone to use these kinds of tools, but, when they do, I would prefer they didn't also comment on these threads they're reading.
This is just my personal preference. Like how sometimes I like to skim things. Not milk.
posted by box at 7:26 PM on July 2, 2011 [5 favorites]
Okay, maybe 'I would strongly encourage anyone to use' is too strong. It's more of an 'I don't mind, much, if someone sometimes uses' kind of thing.
posted by box at 7:28 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by box at 7:28 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
This came up in 2010, sort of. There's extension mentioned in the thread that does what you want.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:29 PM on July 2, 2011
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:29 PM on July 2, 2011
The title kind of says it all.
The title doesn't show up on the front page of MetaTalk, but your post text does. So it'd be better if you put the point of what you're saying in the post text rather than hiding it.
posted by grouse at 7:31 PM on July 2, 2011 [39 favorites]
The title doesn't show up on the front page of MetaTalk, but your post text does. So it'd be better if you put the point of what you're saying in the post text rather than hiding it.
posted by grouse at 7:31 PM on July 2, 2011 [39 favorites]
Any reason why you're asking this on the 4th of July long weekend?
posted by KokuRyu at 7:31 PM on July 2, 2011
posted by KokuRyu at 7:31 PM on July 2, 2011
This would never work as a built-in feature; it splinters the ongoing discussion too much, even more so than threaded comments would.
I have long wanted to see something like it implemented into search, though.
posted by Rhaomi at 7:32 PM on July 2, 2011
I have long wanted to see something like it implemented into search, though.
posted by Rhaomi at 7:32 PM on July 2, 2011
>adding this sort to the site proper would over-emphasize the value of favorites.
The fact that the question is being asked is pretty strong evidence that the value of favorites is already over-emphasized.
posted by Joseph Gurl at 7:34 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
The fact that the question is being asked is pretty strong evidence that the value of favorites is already over-emphasized.
posted by Joseph Gurl at 7:34 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
Any reason why you're asking this on the 4th of July long weekend?
What does that have to do with anything?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:34 PM on July 2, 2011 [4 favorites]
What does that have to do with anything?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:34 PM on July 2, 2011 [4 favorites]
The title doesn't show up on the front page of MetaTalk, but your post text does. So it'd be better if you put the point of what you're saying in the post text rather than hiding it.
Yeah, I was expecting a call-out of that murder trial FPP.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 7:36 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
Yeah, I was expecting a call-out of that murder trial FPP.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 7:36 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
What does that have to do with anything?
I read it as suggesting that the OP is trying to start a fight while the mods are occupied elsewhere.
posted by Bruce H. at 7:39 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
I read it as suggesting that the OP is trying to start a fight while the mods are occupied elsewhere.
posted by Bruce H. at 7:39 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
I'm sure the mods are big boys and girls, but I thought part of etiquette on this MetaFilter is to refrain from posting to MetaTalk on weekends (unless the poster thinks it's absolutely necessary).
posted by KokuRyu at 7:50 PM on July 2, 2011
posted by KokuRyu at 7:50 PM on July 2, 2011
I'm sure the mods are big boys and girls, but I thought part of etiquette on this MetaFilter is to refrain from posting to MetaTalk on weekends (unless the poster thinks it's absolutely necessary).
Well, it's more of a "please maybe refrain from posting horrible shitfuck argument stuff on holiday weekends" thing than anything. Feature requests and other non-horrific-time-and-energy-suck stuff is generally fine, we'll just likely be slower than normal in responding.
And, yes, no, not going to happen.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:54 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
Well, it's more of a "please maybe refrain from posting horrible shitfuck argument stuff on holiday weekends" thing than anything. Feature requests and other non-horrific-time-and-energy-suck stuff is generally fine, we'll just likely be slower than normal in responding.
And, yes, no, not going to happen.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:54 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
I don't think the OP has been around long enough to grasp that bit of etiquette, as they don't have the basics of question formatting down, admitted that they didn't even try to search for previous similar requests, and thought it was a good idea to start a favorites thread.
cupcake1337, no harm, no foul, but you hit a lot of people's hot buttons with your request. Maybe poke around, hang out a little more, before suggesting fundamental site changes? Welcome to MetaFilter.
posted by donnagirl at 7:56 PM on July 2, 2011 [2 favorites]
cupcake1337, no harm, no foul, but you hit a lot of people's hot buttons with your request. Maybe poke around, hang out a little more, before suggesting fundamental site changes? Welcome to MetaFilter.
posted by donnagirl at 7:56 PM on July 2, 2011 [2 favorites]
One other thing - sometimes comments get a lot of favorites because they follow up an earlier comment. Sorting by favorites would destroy the context that make some comments funny/poignant/relevant in the first place.
posted by maryr at 8:09 PM on July 2, 2011 [4 favorites]
posted by maryr at 8:09 PM on July 2, 2011 [4 favorites]
Here at least, the number of favorites is more decorative than valuable.
That favorite really tied the room together.
posted by sonika at 8:11 PM on July 2, 2011 [3 favorites]
That favorite really tied the room together.
posted by sonika at 8:11 PM on July 2, 2011 [3 favorites]
Jesus, uh, OK, let me step back a bit.
I understand what people have said above. I tried to qualify what I was saying. I mean it more for posts that are more funny than substantive. For example, http://www.metafilter.com/105169/Stiff-Sock
The only reason I would want to read the comments would be to see if someone has said something, funny, interesting, whatever. For these kinds of posts, it's not necessary to read everything just before most comment to understand them. They are usually one-line jokes.
posted by cupcake1337 at 8:32 PM on July 2, 2011
I understand what people have said above. I tried to qualify what I was saying. I mean it more for posts that are more funny than substantive. For example, http://www.metafilter.com/105169/Stiff-Sock
The only reason I would want to read the comments would be to see if someone has said something, funny, interesting, whatever. For these kinds of posts, it's not necessary to read everything just before most comment to understand them. They are usually one-line jokes.
posted by cupcake1337 at 8:32 PM on July 2, 2011
Where did you get that idea from?
I'm one of those annoyingly too-sensitive wimps.
posted by KokuRyu at 8:32 PM on July 2, 2011
I'm one of those annoyingly too-sensitive wimps.
posted by KokuRyu at 8:32 PM on July 2, 2011
I thought part of etiquette on this MetaFilter is to refrain from posting to MetaTalk on weekends
If only this were so!
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:47 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
If only this were so!
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:47 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
The title doesn't show up on the front page of MetaTalk, but your post text does. So it'd be better if you put the point of what you're saying in the post text rather than hiding it.
This. Not putting the point of a post in the post itself and only in the title is borderline sociopath behavior.
posted by Deathalicious at 8:53 PM on July 2, 2011
This. Not putting the point of a post in the post itself and only in the title is borderline sociopath behavior.
posted by Deathalicious at 8:53 PM on July 2, 2011
So I just tested out what the form looks like for a MeTa post, and you literally entered in
"The title says it all" and then your more inside, and then, AT THE VERY END, you posted the point of your post. I am sure that in every other context, you are a lovely person, but this thing you did, it is horrific.
posted by Deathalicious at 8:54 PM on July 2, 2011
"The title says it all" and then your more inside, and then, AT THE VERY END, you posted the point of your post. I am sure that in every other context, you are a lovely person, but this thing you did, it is horrific.
posted by Deathalicious at 8:54 PM on July 2, 2011
This. Not putting the point of a post in the post itself and only in the title is borderline sociopath behavior.
I realize this is probably Ha Ha Hyperbole Is Fun stuff, but it'd do for folks to keep in mind that when someone puts something in the title that would be helpful to see if it were displayed on the front page of the appropriate subsite, it's pretty much certainly because they didn't realize the title wouldn't be displayed, not because they're fucking with people or trying to be a jerk.
Benefit of the doubt, etc. Maybe refrain from giving people shit over stuff that doesn't merit being given shit about; make the world (or at least specifically this little corner of it) a slightly better place if possible.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:56 PM on July 2, 2011 [22 favorites]
I realize this is probably Ha Ha Hyperbole Is Fun stuff, but it'd do for folks to keep in mind that when someone puts something in the title that would be helpful to see if it were displayed on the front page of the appropriate subsite, it's pretty much certainly because they didn't realize the title wouldn't be displayed, not because they're fucking with people or trying to be a jerk.
Benefit of the doubt, etc. Maybe refrain from giving people shit over stuff that doesn't merit being given shit about; make the world (or at least specifically this little corner of it) a slightly better place if possible.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:56 PM on July 2, 2011 [22 favorites]
Sorry, I was definitely being hyperbolic, yes, and notice I toned it down to merely being "horrible" in my following comment. But this is the one thing on MetaFilter that drives me up the wall.
And it's not like you guys haven't gone out of your way to discourage this behavior -- the title is THE LAST ITEM IN EVERY FORM ON THE WEBSITE. And when you click on "Preview" for the post, the title IS NOT DISPLAYED.
This is what cupcake saw when they posted their little thing:
Here's how your post is going to look on the MetaTalk page. If you added html, does it look right? It's also a good idea to try out any links before posting. If everything seems right, hit the post button below. If not, hit your browser's back button and tweak the form again.
July 2
The title kind of says it all.
Maybe this has been proposed before. I would search for it, but it would be kind of hard to separate the noise from the signal.Anyway, for some posts, reading the comments in chronological order isn't necessary. Often, I'm just interested in what the most favorited comments are. It would be more efficient to be able to sort comments by number of favorites than browsing.
[will be posted in metafilter >> Feature Requests]
...
So someone doing this, is doing this consciously. It's not postslaughter. It's premeditated posticide.
All that said, cupcake, I'm sorry I called you a borderline sociopath. I hope that you have taken the meaning behind my words to heart and I will never, ever have to look at the title to figure out what you are talking about again.
posted by Deathalicious at 9:09 PM on July 2, 2011
And it's not like you guys haven't gone out of your way to discourage this behavior -- the title is THE LAST ITEM IN EVERY FORM ON THE WEBSITE. And when you click on "Preview" for the post, the title IS NOT DISPLAYED.
This is what cupcake saw when they posted their little thing:
Here's how your post is going to look on the MetaTalk page. If you added html, does it look right? It's also a good idea to try out any links before posting. If everything seems right, hit the post button below. If not, hit your browser's back button and tweak the form again.
July 2
The title kind of says it all.
Maybe this has been proposed before. I would search for it, but it would be kind of hard to separate the noise from the signal.Anyway, for some posts, reading the comments in chronological order isn't necessary. Often, I'm just interested in what the most favorited comments are. It would be more efficient to be able to sort comments by number of favorites than browsing.
[will be posted in metafilter >> Feature Requests]
...
So someone doing this, is doing this consciously. It's not postslaughter. It's premeditated posticide.
All that said, cupcake, I'm sorry I called you a borderline sociopath. I hope that you have taken the meaning behind my words to heart and I will never, ever have to look at the title to figure out what you are talking about again.
posted by Deathalicious at 9:09 PM on July 2, 2011
when someone puts something in the title that would be helpful to see if it were displayed on the front page of the appropriate subsite, it's pretty much certainly because they didn't realize the title wouldn't be displayed, not because they're fucking with people or trying to be a jerk.
That's what happened.
posted by cupcake1337 at 9:17 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
That's what happened.
posted by cupcake1337 at 9:17 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
The only reason I would want to read the comments would be to see if someone has said something, funny, interesting, whatever. For these kinds of posts, it's not necessary to read everything just before most comment to understand them. They are usually one-line jokes.
You'll get pretty good at scrolling quickly and finding the ones with a lot. Or you could do the Greasemonkey thing. Either or.
posted by adamdschneider at 9:21 PM on July 2, 2011
You'll get pretty good at scrolling quickly and finding the ones with a lot. Or you could do the Greasemonkey thing. Either or.
posted by adamdschneider at 9:21 PM on July 2, 2011
How is that what happened? Did you not believe the preview page when it said, "This is how your post is going to appear?"
posted by Deathalicious at 9:42 PM on July 2, 2011
posted by Deathalicious at 9:42 PM on July 2, 2011
Chances are it wasn't read too carefully. You're out of control. Dial it down.
posted by Ice Cream Socialist at 9:48 PM on July 2, 2011
posted by Ice Cream Socialist at 9:48 PM on July 2, 2011
For christ's sake, let it go. People regularly fail to thoroughly reread their own work; because you already know what you wrote or intended to write, you don't scrutinize it as effectively as someone coming fresh to the actual copy would. It happens with posts now and then, it's not a huge deal, and you're kind of being a jerk about this for no apparent reason.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:50 PM on July 2, 2011 [3 favorites]
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:50 PM on July 2, 2011 [3 favorites]
Deathalicious, this is not a big deal. You clicked once to see the title. One click did not sink the Lusitania or assassinate James Garfield. It will not kill you.
posted by koeselitz at 9:53 PM on July 2, 2011
posted by koeselitz at 9:53 PM on July 2, 2011
Yeah, sorry I can see I'm getting overworked. I'll just let it go and walk away.
posted by Deathalicious at 9:55 PM on July 2, 2011 [3 favorites]
posted by Deathalicious at 9:55 PM on July 2, 2011 [3 favorites]
Nah, true sociopathic behavior is people not putting their picture links above the fold in their "what is this?" AskMes.
posted by 6550 at 10:21 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by 6550 at 10:21 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
Chances are it wasn't read too carefully.
And yet the person who didn't read to carefully is suggesting a feature that would kill MetaFilter.... Kind of says it all about favourites, don't you think? :)
posted by Chuckles at 10:22 PM on July 2, 2011
And yet the person who didn't read to carefully is suggesting a feature that would kill MetaFilter.... Kind of says it all about favourites, don't you think? :)
posted by Chuckles at 10:22 PM on July 2, 2011
One click did not sink the Lusitania
Loose clicks sink... uh... sink...
dammit
posted by nanojath at 10:32 PM on July 2, 2011 [2 favorites]
Loose clicks sink... uh... sink...
dammit
posted by nanojath at 10:32 PM on July 2, 2011 [2 favorites]
Dicks. Loose clicks sink dicks.
posted by cgc373 at 11:09 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by cgc373 at 11:09 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
I always thought the dearth of posts on weekends was due to people being busy doing their own work instead of the boss's.
posted by Cranberry at 11:16 PM on July 2, 2011
posted by Cranberry at 11:16 PM on July 2, 2011
I understand but whats this about President Garfield.
posted by clavdivs at 11:28 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by clavdivs at 11:28 PM on July 2, 2011 [1 favorite]
Nah, true sociopathic behavior is people not putting their picture links above the fold in their "what is this?" AskMes.
I know, right? The picture is the single most important thing in your post when you're asking for something to be identified. Why would you want to bury it in the [more inside] so that people have to go our of their way to be able to see it? I can't comprehend what goes through someone's mind when they write, "pic inside!".
posted by Rhomboid at 12:47 AM on July 3, 2011
I know, right? The picture is the single most important thing in your post when you're asking for something to be identified. Why would you want to bury it in the [more inside] so that people have to go our of their way to be able to see it? I can't comprehend what goes through someone's mind when they write, "pic inside!".
posted by Rhomboid at 12:47 AM on July 3, 2011
Jeez. It's not like you have to get up, put on pants and walk outside or anything.
posted by Duke999R at 12:59 AM on July 3, 2011 [2 favorites]
posted by Duke999R at 12:59 AM on July 3, 2011 [2 favorites]
I honestly don't see how favorites relates to quality. It seems completely random. I'm baffled by people favoriting me - some of the stupidest things I've said are some of the most favorited - and then there's people who favorite but don't post. People use favorites differently too, sometimes like bookmarks. I don't have any standard for favoriting things and will sometimes just do it to click on something.
What about the "fantastic comment" flag? Shouldn't we all be using an elaborate system of replying, favorites, flags and greasemonkey scripts?
posted by fuq at 1:06 AM on July 3, 2011
What about the "fantastic comment" flag? Shouldn't we all be using an elaborate system of replying, favorites, flags and greasemonkey scripts?
posted by fuq at 1:06 AM on July 3, 2011
for me favourites are like a like a bookmark that I refer to because of my short term memory loss i see something that i relate too and remember hey i saw an awesome comment on metafilter that relates to just that because metafilter is amazing just the way you are and no one cares that i don't use punctuation or spellcheck
posted by 404 Not Found at 2:27 AM on July 3, 2011
posted by 404 Not Found at 2:27 AM on July 3, 2011
As long as we're piling on the OP (not really OP! Love you!), the real crime here was not searching the archives well before making a post. Doubles get deleted on the Blue, but I think people should put a bit more effort into checking previous posts before posting to the Grey and the Green as well. This took me 10 seconds:
site:metatalk.metafilter.com sort favorites
posted by auto-correct at 2:54 AM on July 3, 2011
site:metatalk.metafilter.com sort favorites
posted by auto-correct at 2:54 AM on July 3, 2011
(That said, GraphFi has become integral to the way I interact with the site, so I totally understand where the sentiment is coming from)
posted by auto-correct at 2:56 AM on July 3, 2011
posted by auto-correct at 2:56 AM on July 3, 2011
I'm drawing a line in the sand [see below]. This is a hotly debated aspect of the site (favorites) to the degree that admin has introduced a way to turn off favorites, and conducted an optional no-favorites period in which people could see how "favoriting" affected or didn't affect their participation. We've had many posts and threads on this, and most people who follow MetaTalk have developed their own deeply held feelings and opinions about this.
Can we spare the moderators just a couple of days of relatively drama-free activity here on a holiday weekend for a subject that has been so thoroughly hashed and rehashed? Can we at least wait until next week to debate it again?
Both Favorites-Pro and Favorites-Con have their emotional reactions and reasoned arguments about this, but can we wait until... say, Tuesday to share again?
Here's the line >>>>>
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
posted by taz at 3:01 AM on July 3, 2011 [1 favorite]
Can we spare the moderators just a couple of days of relatively drama-free activity here on a holiday weekend for a subject that has been so thoroughly hashed and rehashed? Can we at least wait until next week to debate it again?
Both Favorites-Pro and Favorites-Con have their emotional reactions and reasoned arguments about this, but can we wait until... say, Tuesday to share again?
Here's the line >>>>>
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
posted by taz at 3:01 AM on July 3, 2011 [1 favorite]
Out of respect for the OP, I feel we should apply favorites to the comments in this thread such that they are sorted in decreasing order.
posted by kaibutsu at 3:08 AM on July 3, 2011
posted by kaibutsu at 3:08 AM on July 3, 2011
Hey taz, I see the line but where's the damn sand?
posted by a humble nudibranch at 3:38 AM on July 3, 2011
posted by a humble nudibranch at 3:38 AM on July 3, 2011
GraphFi has proved to be a boon when I'm catching up on long threads or have been away for a day or so.
Given the time though, I'd prefer to read ccomments in the order in which they were posted.
Sorting by favourites means that "First" would likely be last and I'm easily enough confused as it is.
posted by arcticseal at 3:47 AM on July 3, 2011
Given the time though, I'd prefer to read ccomments in the order in which they were posted.
Sorting by favourites means that "First" would likely be last and I'm easily enough confused as it is.
posted by arcticseal at 3:47 AM on July 3, 2011
I would like to hear cortex doing a very sincere and heartfelt cover of "Heal the World" with MetaFilter specific lyrics.
Action Items:
1. Somebody get on those lyrics
2. Cortex work up some kind of guitar bit for it
3. Cortex Do it, record it.
4. Cortex upload it to MeFiMu
I'd like you all to consider this "crunch time" and make this project your new top priority. Please alert me at completion of each milestone.
posted by Meatbomb at 4:53 AM on July 3, 2011 [2 favorites]
Action Items:
1. Somebody get on those lyrics
2. Cortex work up some kind of guitar bit for it
3. Cortex Do it, record it.
4. Cortex upload it to MeFiMu
I'd like you all to consider this "crunch time" and make this project your new top priority. Please alert me at completion of each milestone.
posted by Meatbomb at 4:53 AM on July 3, 2011 [2 favorites]
Damn, and I just thought of the perfect angle for my upcoming spoiler thread.
posted by cj_ at 5:14 AM on July 3, 2011
posted by cj_ at 5:14 AM on July 3, 2011
Here's the line >>>>>
Greater than what?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:00 AM on July 3, 2011 [1 favorite]
Greater than what?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:00 AM on July 3, 2011 [1 favorite]
Dicks. Loose clicks sink dicks.
Makes no sense. Should be eat, obv.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 7:11 AM on July 3, 2011
Makes no sense. Should be eat, obv.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 7:11 AM on July 3, 2011
The only reason I would want to read the comments would be to see if someone has said something, funny, interesting, whatever. For these kinds of posts, it's not necessary to read everything just before most comment to understand them. They are usually one-line jokes.
Consider please that popular opinion is not a high-signal indicator of hilarity/relevance. See 2.5 Men, for instance. The truly funny one-liner (to you) may not do anything for anyone else, so if you rely on everyone else to point it out to you you'll never see it. Read the discussion and decide for yourself.
Anyway, the best way to spot a one-liner is to look for comments one line long. Self-defeating ZING!
posted by carsonb at 7:53 AM on July 3, 2011
Consider please that popular opinion is not a high-signal indicator of hilarity/relevance. See 2.5 Men, for instance. The truly funny one-liner (to you) may not do anything for anyone else, so if you rely on everyone else to point it out to you you'll never see it. Read the discussion and decide for yourself.
Anyway, the best way to spot a one-liner is to look for comments one line long. Self-defeating ZING!
posted by carsonb at 7:53 AM on July 3, 2011
Just scroll down through the thread and look at the "favourites" numbers. Only read the comments that have the biggest numbers.
posted by ThatCanadianGirl at 8:00 AM on July 3, 2011
posted by ThatCanadianGirl at 8:00 AM on July 3, 2011
When I watch anything comedic, I definitely prefer to view all the gags that get the biggest laughs first and work my way down to the mildly funny bits, regardless of chronology. Because comedy doesn't depend at all on context, pacing, or timing.
It might save the mods some work and prevent baptisms of fire like the one cupcake1337 is experiencing if MeTa posts by new members went into a mod approval queue for a month or two.
posted by FelliniBlank at 8:53 AM on July 3, 2011 [1 favorite]
It might save the mods some work and prevent baptisms of fire like the one cupcake1337 is experiencing if MeTa posts by new members went into a mod approval queue for a month or two.
posted by FelliniBlank at 8:53 AM on July 3, 2011 [1 favorite]
I'd be in favor of a do-you-really-want-to-do-this LURK MOAR warning at least.
posted by grouse at 9:01 AM on July 3, 2011
posted by grouse at 9:01 AM on July 3, 2011
I propose that all cake-based usernames are given a large box of Country Kettle fudge and unlimited hugs this weekend.
posted by mintcake! at 9:10 AM on July 3, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by mintcake! at 9:10 AM on July 3, 2011 [1 favorite]
I propose that all cake-based usernames are given a large box of Country Kettle fudge and unlimited hugs this weekend.
Would you settle for internet hugs?
{{{cake}}}
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:12 AM on July 3, 2011
Would you settle for internet hugs?
{{{cake}}}
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:12 AM on July 3, 2011
i have 14 favourites and what is this
posted by subbes at 9:18 AM on July 3, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by subbes at 9:18 AM on July 3, 2011 [1 favorite]
It might save the mods some work and prevent baptisms of fire like the one cupcake1337 is experiencing if MeTa posts by new members went into a mod approval queue for a month or two.
My immediate thought is that I don't feel like any significant proportion of bumpy metatalk posts are started by folks whose accounts are 1-2 months old, and that there's nothing wrong in any case with newer folks making metatalk posts so creating more friction there for just that subset feels a little weird.
But it'd probably be possible to at least partially explore that space with numbers; a look at the data in the Infodump to correlate newness-of-poster to e.g. number of comments in a thread might point to whether there's pileups, for example, though that's a gestural metric at best probably. Behind the scenes I could correlate flagging data and probably get a better first-blush picture of where controversy or bad behavior is showing up.
But more generally, the best solution to avoid the trial-by-fire effect is for folks to collectively make the decision not to respond to metatalk posts with flamethrowers. We'd get a lot of mileage out of just remembering that what is old hat to us is not old hat to everyone, that there are always newer folks showing up and getting to know the site (or this part of the site) for the first time, that just because any one of us have been wearied by the asked-and-answered nature of some perennial pony request doesn't mean we should be rude to someone asking it in earnest for the first time.
This place can be bumpy, yes, but that's because we make it bumpy, not because the universe requires it to be so. It's totally possible to say "hey, this has been covered before, see here and here" to someone politely and helpfully, or to civilly discuss policy stuff, and this thread isn't an overall bad example of that as things go. Abandoning the expectation or even endorsement of the Get 'Em, Boys hazing reaction to new folks' questions is by far the best approach available, far more so than fencing the new folks off by fiat for their own protection.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:24 AM on July 3, 2011 [7 favorites]
My immediate thought is that I don't feel like any significant proportion of bumpy metatalk posts are started by folks whose accounts are 1-2 months old, and that there's nothing wrong in any case with newer folks making metatalk posts so creating more friction there for just that subset feels a little weird.
But it'd probably be possible to at least partially explore that space with numbers; a look at the data in the Infodump to correlate newness-of-poster to e.g. number of comments in a thread might point to whether there's pileups, for example, though that's a gestural metric at best probably. Behind the scenes I could correlate flagging data and probably get a better first-blush picture of where controversy or bad behavior is showing up.
But more generally, the best solution to avoid the trial-by-fire effect is for folks to collectively make the decision not to respond to metatalk posts with flamethrowers. We'd get a lot of mileage out of just remembering that what is old hat to us is not old hat to everyone, that there are always newer folks showing up and getting to know the site (or this part of the site) for the first time, that just because any one of us have been wearied by the asked-and-answered nature of some perennial pony request doesn't mean we should be rude to someone asking it in earnest for the first time.
This place can be bumpy, yes, but that's because we make it bumpy, not because the universe requires it to be so. It's totally possible to say "hey, this has been covered before, see here and here" to someone politely and helpfully, or to civilly discuss policy stuff, and this thread isn't an overall bad example of that as things go. Abandoning the expectation or even endorsement of the Get 'Em, Boys hazing reaction to new folks' questions is by far the best approach available, far more so than fencing the new folks off by fiat for their own protection.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:24 AM on July 3, 2011 [7 favorites]
Anything that makes a site more like Reddit is probably a bad thing.
posted by codacorolla at 10:06 AM on July 3, 2011
posted by codacorolla at 10:06 AM on July 3, 2011
Action Item 1 complete!
Heal MeFi
There’s a place in this thread
And I know that it is love
And this thread could be much
Pithier by tomorrow
And if you really try
You’ll find there’s no need to flag
A comment in this thread
And bother Restless_Nomad
There are ways to get there
If you care enough
For all MeFites
Think a moment
Before you comment…
Heal MeFi
Make the site a better place
For you and for me and for
Brandon Blatcher, grouse, & Griphus.
There won’t be any trolling
If you care enough for the posting
Make MeFi a better place
For you and for me
If you want to know why
Jessamyn and Cortex get fried
It’s because Most MeFites
Mean well but start opinionating
And may cross the line
Which starts the alienating
Pile ups we all dread
And soon it’s all threadshitting.
But then it feels that always
{{{hugs}}} are enough for
us calming
So please hope us
Please hope us…
Heal MeFi
Make the site a better place
For you and for me and for
Meatbomb, KokyRyu & clavdivs.
There won’t be any trolling
If you care enough for the posting
Make MeFi a better place
For you and for me
For you and mathowie
posted by smirkette at 12:17 PM on July 3, 2011 [2 favorites]
Heal MeFi
There’s a place in this thread
And I know that it is love
And this thread could be much
Pithier by tomorrow
And if you really try
You’ll find there’s no need to flag
A comment in this thread
And bother Restless_Nomad
There are ways to get there
If you care enough
For all MeFites
Think a moment
Before you comment…
Heal MeFi
Make the site a better place
For you and for me and for
Brandon Blatcher, grouse, & Griphus.
There won’t be any trolling
If you care enough for the posting
Make MeFi a better place
For you and for me
If you want to know why
Jessamyn and Cortex get fried
It’s because Most MeFites
Mean well but start opinionating
And may cross the line
Which starts the alienating
Pile ups we all dread
And soon it’s all threadshitting.
But then it feels that always
{{{hugs}}} are enough for
us calming
So please hope us
Please hope us…
Heal MeFi
Make the site a better place
For you and for me and for
Meatbomb, KokyRyu & clavdivs.
There won’t be any trolling
If you care enough for the posting
Make MeFi a better place
For you and for me
For you and mathowie
posted by smirkette at 12:17 PM on July 3, 2011 [2 favorites]
It's terribly embarrassing to admit that it's taken so long for me to see, and I'm sure most of you take it so much for granted insofar as it's true that no one bothers to state it any longer-- and even at that it has taken On the Media rubbing my nose in it for me to see it-- but adding favorites has transformed Metafilter into a video game!
It plays slow, and it must be pretty hard, considering that only one excellent player, jessamyn, has achieved the elite permanent star level, but it sure has pulled me in, and I can't seem to stop playing despite the fact that I never get any better at it.
posted by jamjam at 7:53 PM on July 3, 2011
It plays slow, and it must be pretty hard, considering that only one excellent player, jessamyn, has achieved the elite permanent star level, but it sure has pulled me in, and I can't seem to stop playing despite the fact that I never get any better at it.
posted by jamjam at 7:53 PM on July 3, 2011
We'd get a lot of mileage out of just remembering that what is old hat to us is not old hat to everyone
In my old age (30, man, sigh) I am finding that this is one of the best way to stay both young and kind.
posted by maryr at 9:40 PM on July 3, 2011
In my old age (30, man, sigh) I am finding that this is one of the best way to stay both young and kind.
posted by maryr at 9:40 PM on July 3, 2011
I had a little trouble figuring out the title thing way back when, too. I distinctly remember that. Anyway, welcome cupcake1337, and I hope this doesn't put you off. MetaFilter stirs strong feelings among its users, especially when it comes to subjects like this. The cool thing is that you got what you were looking for, albeit with a little name-calling.
MF: ygwywlf, awaln-c. I'm not proud.
posted by Nabubrush at 11:09 PM on July 3, 2011
MF: ygwywlf, awaln-c. I'm not proud.
posted by Nabubrush at 11:09 PM on July 3, 2011
Abandoning the expectation or even endorsement of the Get 'Em, Boys hazing reaction to new folks' questions is by far the best approach --- but only 1/10 th as entertaining.
posted by crunchland at 3:50 AM on July 4, 2011
posted by crunchland at 3:50 AM on July 4, 2011
Take the site
Make it a better place
For you and for me
And the entire userbase
posted by Meatbomb at 3:59 AM on July 4, 2011
Make it a better place
For you and for me
And the entire userbase
posted by Meatbomb at 3:59 AM on July 4, 2011
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by ericost at 7:16 PM on July 2, 2011 [6 favorites]