No More Mr Frothy February 8, 2012 8:38 PM   Subscribe

OK. Tired of "santorum" now.

I don't want to be That Guy. But the current Santorum Surges From Behind thread bothers me, simply because the discussion about "santorum" is blotting out useful discussion of important issues.

So, thanks, we've all "GOOGLE'D SANTORUM." Yeah, I think Santorum is sketchy as a candidate. But, for a month or so, at least, he'll be in the news. Can we drop the "frothy" discussion for awhile and focus on real issues?
posted by SPrintF to Etiquette/Policy at 8:38 PM (217 comments total) 7 users marked this as a favorite

Even better, could we decide that Metafilter isn't going to be "Election Central" for the next nine months? And kill all posts relating to the US election?
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 8:42 PM on February 8, 2012 [56 favorites]


As much as I dislike little Rickey, I agree that the Santorum jokes are pretty stale by now.
posted by octothorpe at 8:44 PM on February 8, 2012 [4 favorites]


Ha, ha, ha! Oh, you so funny.
posted by Curious Artificer at 8:45 PM on February 8, 2012


Why did you link that specific comment? It seems to actually discuss the person of Rick Santorum, or at least his rep with social conservatives, rather than any sort of "froth" as it were.
posted by Existential Dread at 8:47 PM on February 8, 2012


I would encourage people to use this thing I found while exploring the site for future political posts. Frankly, political stories are going to be unavoidable for the next few months.
posted by Renoroc at 8:49 PM on February 8, 2012


This whole Santorum situation started out as innocent fun with Google and it got out of control and was fun for a while but now it has become uncomfortable/weird and awkward and made a big stinky mess.
posted by humanfont at 8:51 PM on February 8, 2012 [1 favorite]


It was only a matter of time before there was a discussion of Santorum on the brown section of the site.
posted by grouse at 8:52 PM on February 8, 2012 [5 favorites]


PoliticalFilter no longer exists which is a terrible shame because it would be very nice to not make this place into US Election Central for the next six to eight months. I agree, the Santorum Googlebombing stuff is getting tired.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:52 PM on February 8, 2012 [9 favorites]


Poop.
posted by ColdChef at 8:54 PM on February 8, 2012 [2 favorites]

...it would be very nice to not make this place into US Election Central for the next six to eight months.
You can make it happen. You have the power, Magical Girl Jessamyn!
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 8:58 PM on February 8, 2012 [3 favorites]


I'm just the janitor, man.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:59 PM on February 8, 2012 [34 favorites]


Well, you can clean up the mess! Same difference!
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 9:02 PM on February 8, 2012


Yeah, it's gotten tedious. I only posted mine because I really liked the poling/polling pun. I promise to stop now.
posted by benito.strauss at 9:03 PM on February 8, 2012


As a non american looking on in bewildered fascination I can honestly say that santorum seems to be the least disgusting element of Santorum's campaign. If nothing else the side discussion would appear to distract from the pathetic idiocy of the GOP electoral run.

I'm not sure now much of anything election related is, at this point, Best of the Web? Calling out santorum seems to be a minor point on the issue.
posted by mce at 9:03 PM on February 8, 2012 [1 favorite]


Sorry...but it comes with the territory.

I can't help it! The jokes make themselves!
posted by the young rope-rider at 9:03 PM on February 8, 2012 [2 favorites]


Yes, it's stupid and distracting.
posted by 2bucksplus at 9:04 PM on February 8, 2012


Even better, could we decide that Metafilter isn't going to be "Election Central" for the next nine months? And kill all posts relating to the US election?

You are not going to enjoy the next 9 months. If you don't like U.S. politics threads, don't click U.S. politics threads?
posted by 2bucksplus at 9:06 PM on February 8, 2012 [14 favorites]


*Just* a janitor?

Oh, Jessamyn, don't sell yourself short like that. If you aspire, you could be like Henry Darger. He, too, was a janitor, but he was so much more...

Fight the good fight, don't give up! WIN!
posted by symbioid at 9:08 PM on February 8, 2012 [3 favorites]


Darger was only realized as a true outsider artist and bizarre creative genius after he died and his landlords took all of his stuff and capitalized on it. I can do better. Flag early and often if you're seeing something you don't like, folks.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:16 PM on February 8, 2012 [2 favorites]


This whole Santorum situation started out as innocent fun with Google

no, it didn't. at least the "innocent" part. from the beginning it was about his thinly veiled, offensive hatred of people who's sex and gender lives don't conform to the narrow boundaries he imposes on them.
posted by cupcake1337 at 9:17 PM on February 8, 2012 [15 favorites]


Giving up on the jokes means admitting he is actually politically relevant again and not just a punchline. Don't make me do that.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 9:21 PM on February 8, 2012 [19 favorites]


Santorum has sullied the site.
posted by Artw at 9:21 PM on February 8, 2012


We are not even in the nasty bit of election time yet, FWIW.
posted by Artw at 9:22 PM on February 8, 2012


There's a good story in the LA Times today on other candidate's Google problems. Well, mostly good because it has lots of ME in it.
posted by msalt at 9:33 PM on February 8, 2012 [1 favorite]


As to the second point of "not making it Election Central" I certainly agree that an excess of posts is anathema but the time honored advice of if you don't care for the subject matter skip the post is very relevant. As to not making fun of Santorum... eh, I find the jokes about Ricky less disturbing than Ricky himself.
posted by edgeways at 9:35 PM on February 8, 2012 [1 favorite]


Unrelated but if we could kill all "rick rick" jokes at the same time that would just be terrific.
posted by smoke at 9:41 PM on February 8, 2012 [11 favorites]


2bucksplus: " You are not going to enjoy the next 9 months. If you don't like U.S. politics threads, don't click U.S. politics threads?"

I like US politics threads and post them every once in a while, but I do find I'm participating in them less often. They are regularly invaded by folks who campaign for their pet candidates (and against those who piss them off,) even in threads that aren't directly about the election. Someone complained that this was happening in the thread I posted on Tuesday about the Perry vs. Schwarzenegger decision. Their comment was apparently deleted. Another person has now also complained.

The discussion about President Obama's record on same sex marriage wasn't off topic. But the moment it appeared, it was obvious that the thread was not going to return to the original content of the post.
posted by zarq at 9:44 PM on February 8, 2012 [3 favorites]


Frankly, comments that exist for no reason other than to make a sexual double entendre, and not to discuss the actual topic and hand, are off-topic and should be deleted. All they do is make the thread harder to read. They're not even particularly funny or original anymore.
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 9:45 PM on February 8, 2012 [4 favorites]


And by "a sexual double entendre," I really mean the same one over and over and over and over and over and over. It was funny in 2004. Now, it just distracts from the discussion of relevant topics, like Newt's moon colony, or how crazy Republican voters are.
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 9:48 PM on February 8, 2012 [2 favorites]


All they do is make the thread harder
posted by edgeways at 9:49 PM on February 8, 2012 [4 favorites]


sorry
posted by edgeways at 9:49 PM on February 8, 2012


that's not helping
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 9:50 PM on February 8, 2012


I get paid all week to help people and do a good job at it.. currently? I'm on vacation
posted by edgeways at 9:55 PM on February 8, 2012 [5 favorites]


Whoever the GOP nominee is, I already know I will find both party's nominees absolutely disgusting. Obama has literally destroyed my faith in politics, and I plan to pay no attention to the upcoming election whatsoever.

That said, it is a huge huge news event and to not want a site like this to mention it does not make any sense. Skips the posts if you don't want to read them. I know I will.
posted by drjimmy11 at 10:44 PM on February 8, 2012 [5 favorites]


Tired of santorum? Use a rubber.
posted by Ardiril at 10:52 PM on February 8, 2012


The sweater vest is very absorbent.
posted by Burhanistan at 11:21 PM on February 8, 2012


Tired of santorum? DTMFA.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:37 PM on February 8, 2012 [2 favorites]


No sense frothing at the mouth about it.
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:50 PM on February 8, 2012 [4 favorites]


hey girl...rick santorum style
posted by nadawi at 12:10 AM on February 9, 2012 [5 favorites]


No sense frothing at the mouth about it.

You're doing it wrong.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:21 AM on February 9, 2012 [14 favorites]


Obama has literally destroyed my faith in politics

Wow. Your faith in politics must have been pretty fragile. There are millions of people who believed in George Bush and Richard Nixon. Imagine how they feel.

Or Gary Hart and John Edwards and Tony Blair and Ralph Nader, if you want lefter examples.
posted by msalt at 12:58 AM on February 9, 2012 [3 favorites]


One can use My Mefi to exclude posts with tagged as politics or with any of the candidates names.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:40 AM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


Just wait for the frothy mixture of unearned privilege and lunatic bigotry that a Romney/Santorum will bring together: they might have little chance of winning, but it nicely squares the circle that otherwise puts a lot of tension between fiscal and social conservatives during a recession and jobless recovery.
posted by anotherpanacea at 3:53 AM on February 9, 2012


Whoever the GOP nominee is, I already know I will find both party's nominees absolutely disgusting. Obama has literally destroyed my faith in politics...

You are not alone, regardless of those who enjoy rubbing msalt in the wound.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 3:55 AM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


I'm extremely tired of santorum too. But I still like the poop jokes.
posted by DU at 4:34 AM on February 9, 2012 [11 favorites]


"Well, mostly good because it has lots of ME in it."

Huh, so it does. That's cool.

"Even better, could we decide that Metafilter isn't going to be 'Election Central' for the next nine months? And kill all posts relating to the US election?"

Also, world peace and a pony for me.
posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 4:44 AM on February 9, 2012


Frankly, comments that exist for no reason other than to make a sexual double entendre, and not to discuss the actual topic and hand, are off-topic and should be deleted.

That would be horrible. As far as I know staying strictly "on-topic" is not a prerequisite for participating in a Metafilter discussion. (Except in AskMe.)
posted by OmieWise at 5:13 AM on February 9, 2012 [4 favorites]


And no more making fun of sweater vests. They have officially been cool since January 9, 1970.
posted by marxchivist at 5:19 AM on February 9, 2012


For relaxing times, make it Santorum time.
posted by Houyhnhnm at 5:24 AM on February 9, 2012 [10 favorites]


I don't want to be That Guy.

I'm tired of "That Guy," frankly.
posted by jonmc at 5:46 AM on February 9, 2012 [4 favorites]


I know people are tired of the rick rick rick jokes too, but they aren't being deleted, are they? I understand the difference here in terms of the pure noise factor, but, aside from the somewhat worrying question as to whether santorum punning may read as edging into homophobia territory, I'm not sure why there should be a ban on the jokes.

Dan Savage seriously gets on my nerves, but his santorum redefinition was a bit of political protest. And that there's a consciousness of that new def of santorum is a result of that protest. To clamp down on the jokes is to cut down on the part of the discussion addressing Santorum's extremist views.

Also, I like poop jokes. I've made several boyfriends uncomfortable with my love of poop jokes. And punning is the vilest form of wit. So when they go on forever, I can see why they get on other's people's nerves.

But I think, as one person did, that the jokes are 'vile' is going too far. There's nothing vile about poop. God made poop.

Santorum, though, is one evil motherfucker.
posted by angrycat at 5:56 AM on February 9, 2012 [18 favorites]


Sometimes I feel bad for Santorum getting pegged with that nickname.
posted by xorry at 6:04 AM on February 9, 2012 [4 favorites]


Me too, then I listen to the things he says...and any empathy for him goes away.
posted by Chekhovian at 6:14 AM on February 9, 2012 [6 favorites]


It's not just us. Today's top headline in the Boston Globe:

SANTORUM SURGE IS TELLING FOR ROMNEY
posted by Curious Artificer at 6:36 AM on February 9, 2012 [3 favorites]


I'm surprised that people I thought were smart still think they are being clever with these jokes.

It's like the puns of politics threads: not as funny as it is in your head.
posted by smackfu at 6:59 AM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


I don't think people believe they're being funny. This is about signalling your distaste for a pretty obnoxious politician, at least for me.

Funny story: Rick Santorum was an undergraduate in political science at Penn State, where I got my PhD. Apparently he confided to one of our professors that he wanted to go into politics, but wasn't sure if he should be a Democrat or a Republican. The professor, unfortunately, gave an honest answer: given the state of the Republican field in the late 70s, he predicted that working with the Republicans would be much more likely to lead to political success. Santorum followed his advice, and the rest is history.

But it seems important to me that all the lunacy that has followed was ultimately started because of a prudential calculation of electability: talk about basing your opinions on polling data! I'm sure Santorum really believes it, now, but it could have easily gone the other way, and he'd be just as fervent a liberal as he is a conservative.

A lot of things are like that, I think.
posted by anotherpanacea at 7:12 AM on February 9, 2012 [2 favorites]


Unrelated but if we could kill all "rick rick" jokes at the same time that would just be terrific.

RICK

RICK

RICK

SANTORUM
posted by grog at 7:16 AM on February 9, 2012 [24 favorites]


You know, I'm tired of a lot of the overused, stupid jokes that come up on Metafilter constantly. However, I don't think it's for me to say that it's time for them to stop. Apparently there are plenty of people who still dig them, and that's ok for them. And I'm enough of a big boy to handle the fact that others like stuff I don't.
posted by crunchland at 7:48 AM on February 9, 2012 [4 favorites]


MetaFilter: a lot of the overused, stupid jokes
posted by grouse at 7:49 AM on February 9, 2012 [2 favorites]


Obama has literally destroyed my faith in politics, and I plan to pay no attention to the upcoming election whatsoever.

"You're Doing It Wrong." (tm)
posted by aught at 7:51 AM on February 9, 2012 [2 favorites]


Me too, then I listen to the things he says...and any empathy for him goes away.

Amen. After all the foolishness in the recent thread I was also kind of feeling that no one deserved to be google-bombed and obscenely mocked the way he has been.

And then driving to work this morning I heard a recording of him rattling off a half-dozen outrageous, offensive, unhinged statements in a press conference and thought to myself, "This smug, judgmental, sanctimonious bastard deserves it."

Whoever made the misguided stance in that thread that Santorum was a "decent" man... no. Seriously, no. He's as dangerous a political figure as the U.S. has seen in a long time.
posted by aught at 8:02 AM on February 9, 2012


He's a terrific asshole, but that doesn't mean that people need to spend time on MeFi trying to out-asshole each other hating on him. Go work to keep the guy from getting elected, please, but an online group hate session here both doesn't change anything in the real world and makes the site look like it's full of people who don't have any better way to manage or express their emotional responses to what's going on in the world of politics.

He is terrible. That doesn't mean that MeFi needs to become terrible in response to him.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:05 AM on February 9, 2012 [20 favorites]


Obama has literally destroyed my faith in politics

That's fine. An observant person will probably have their faith in religion, politics, major league sports figures, and hot dogs shattered, or at least seriously deformed at some point. A practical person realizes that these are all merely contingent things made by men and women, and picks up and carries on, humbler for being better able to see the world as it is.

I don't think people believe they're being funny.

I really thought mine was funny. :-/

... aside from the somewhat worrying question as to whether santorum punning may read as edging into homophobia territory, ....

Straights have anal too. (wack-a-doo wack-a-doo).

posted by benito.strauss at 8:16 AM on February 9, 2012 [3 favorites]


drjimmy11: "Whoever the GOP nominee is, I already know I will find both party's nominees absolutely disgusting. Obama has literally destroyed my faith in politics, and I plan to pay no attention to the upcoming election whatsoever."

There was no possible way that President Obama was going to be able to fulfill every one of his campaign promises. No possible way and this was very obvious to many of us -- even though we were then excoriated online for daring to go against the status quo. Obama's campaign was idealistic, and not necessarily realistic, because the President does not operate in a vacuum. He has to deal with Congress. He has to deal with the Republican tactic of voting against all Democratic initiatives as a unified bloc, and the crap they, their media outlets and pundits spew at him and the Dems on a regular basis. Plus the economy's in the toilet. And we've been fighting two wars with a military that was never properly equipped to wage more than one.

When you tally all that together, three things become apparent:

1) He over promised.
2) It's actually rather impressive that he's been able to accomplish what he has.
3) It's disappointing and depressing as hell that he hasn't taken a principled stand for certain ideals which mean so much to the people who voted him into office.

But apathy and non-action perpetuate the problem of crappy candidates. If you are repulsed by them but do nothing to support and encourage decent, well-intentioned opponents, you help to create a self-fulfilling prophecy. A cycle with no end.

I vote because by doing so, I bring funds to my district that would otherwise be lost. And I vote because it's my right by law to do so, and it wasn't all that many generations ago that my ancestors didn't have it. And I vote to be heard, and hopefully change the system from within. But voting should be the beginning, not the end of our involvement in the process.
posted by zarq at 8:28 AM on February 9, 2012 [26 favorites]


Politics in general is usually almost insufferable, but listening to liberals raise a hue and cry about how Obama has let them down has gotten to be too painful for me to bear.
posted by koeselitz at 8:36 AM on February 9, 2012 [8 favorites]


I feel you man, but this kind of thing is impossible to stop. It's not a "Metafilter thing", it's everywhere.
posted by thelonius at 8:37 AM on February 9, 2012


It's not a "Metafilter thing", it's everywhere.

It is an 'online thing' in my opinion.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:51 AM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


I'm sure Santorum really believes it, now, but it could have easily gone the other way, and he'd be just as fervent a liberal as he is a conservative.

He wasn't sure about what party to pick, not what part of the political spectrum to inhabit. Back in the 70s in particular there were a lot of conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans. Not to mention the fact that his views in general were probably more mainstream at the time. We've moved on but he hasn't.
posted by DU at 8:56 AM on February 9, 2012 [3 favorites]


However, I don't think it's for me to say that it's time for them to stop. Apparently there are plenty of people who still dig them, and that's ok for them.

Eh, all it takes is a few people who constantly do it, and sometimes all it takes to stop it is someone saying "ok, that's enough". Saying nothing is certainly not going to do anything!
posted by smackfu at 8:57 AM on February 9, 2012


If you are repulsed by them but do nothing to support and encourage decent, well-intentioned opponents...

Agreed. That's why I'll be voting for one of Obama's opponents this year. In 4 years, his successor can figure out how to win my vote back, if s/he wants it and the system improves.
posted by DU at 8:58 AM on February 9, 2012 [2 favorites]


makes the site look like it's full of people who don't have any better way to manage or express their emotional responses to what's going on in the world of politics.

I actually think the jokes are better than some of the flaming angry hyperbole-filled screeds you can usually find in a politics thread in terms of what they say about managing emotional responses. A lot of stuff about Metafilter can make the site look like it's full of people who ________. Santorum jokes are very far down the list of things that bother me to be associated with by virtue of my membership on Metafilter, and I don't think I've ever made one. MetaTalk, on the other hand...at least the Santorum jokes will peter out (sorry) when the election's over. Maybe even the primaries. This shit is built in to the site!
posted by Hoopo at 9:05 AM on February 9, 2012


but an online group hate session here both doesn't change anything in the real world and makes the site look like it's full of people who don't have any better way to manage or express their emotional responses to what's going on in the world of politics.

Or, it looks like many contributors view MetaFilter as a particular community where they feel comfortable making such comments. Perhaps the downside of MF being a cohesive place people strongly identify with is that some contributors are occasionally going to "embarrass" the "adults" with their intensity of feeling or lack of sophistication.
posted by aught at 9:24 AM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


It kinda makes me feel bad for all the other people named Santorum. Just imagine all the kids in school, being harrassed and tormented just because their name is Santorum. When we engage in this kind of behavior, we are smearing not just the presidential candiate, but everyone with that name.
posted by Ad hominem at 9:42 AM on February 9, 2012 [3 favorites]


It's like the puns of politics threads: not as funny as it is in your head.

A wise man once told me that the only bad pun is the one you didn't think of first.
posted by Gygesringtone at 9:44 AM on February 9, 2012 [3 favorites]


I will say that, all the politics-specific stuff aside, one of the things I like about Metafilter is the capacity of its membership to be awfully clever. And we've really run well out of the territory of Santorum jokes that are new or clever. And that's mostly an emergent effect of the guy's return to something resembling serious candidacy over the arc of this bizarro GOP primary season, but, still: it makes me sad. I want better jokes and more self-control on the retread stuff.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:50 AM on February 9, 2012 [6 favorites]


No.
posted by chillmost at 10:24 AM on February 9, 2012 [2 favorites]


I feel you man, but this kind of thing is impossible to stop. It's not a "Metafilter thing", it's everywhere.

We may not have the power to stop it everywhere, but we can stop it on MetaFilter.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 10:45 AM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


I think we've been Rick Rolled.

And we're never gonna give it up.
posted by evilmidnightbomberwhatbombsatmidnight at 10:56 AM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


I guess I don't see an urgent need to stop it. The main issue here seems to by mild annoyance.
posted by Hoopo at 11:05 AM on February 9, 2012


We may not have the power to stop it everywhere, but we can stop it on MetaFilter. --- Are you talking about stopping the Santorum joke, or are you talking about stopping the disaffection of Obama?
posted by crunchland at 11:21 AM on February 9, 2012


Some people take this website way too seriously.
posted by Ardiril at 11:21 AM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


He is terrible. That doesn't mean that MeFi needs to become terrible in response to him.

This. Totally this.
posted by guster4lovers at 11:24 AM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


PoliticalFilter no longer exists which is a terrible shame because it would be very nice to not make this place into US Election Central for the next six to eight months.

The only thing worse than this place becoming PoliticalFilter is it becoming Obitfilter.

What was that yesterday? Minor candy manufacturer dies? WTF?!? I wanted to squirt a warm, frothy stream of Santorum all over that thread.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 11:34 AM on February 9, 2012 [3 favorites]


Jesus. You guys know you don't have to go into every thread, right?
posted by Hoopo at 11:37 AM on February 9, 2012 [5 favorites]


PeterMcDermott: " What was that yesterday? Minor candy manufacturer dies? WTF?!? I wanted to squirt a warm, frothy stream of Santorum all over that thread."

Guy led an interesting life. The linked obit was an decent read.
posted by zarq at 11:46 AM on February 9, 2012


"We may not have the power to stop it everywhere, but we can stop it on MetaFilter.

I have the power to stop it everywhere. But with great power comes great responsibility.
posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 11:52 AM on February 9, 2012


And a guy with mechanical arms who wants to kill you.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:54 AM on February 9, 2012


It was a coupon thing.
posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 11:57 AM on February 9, 2012 [2 favorites]


PoliticalFilter no longer exists which is a terrible shame...

Stop that, you're making me think of doing it again. But better this time, stronger, faster ...
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:58 AM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


It's not a "Metafilter thing", it's everywhere.

The jokes write themselves.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:03 PM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


Now that Santorum is all over Metafilter and the jokes have gotten crusty, I think it's time to just wash the site clean of him.
posted by octobersurprise at 12:48 PM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


Ahh, election time on MetaFilter. When I'm briefly reminded there are non-Americans in the audience because they complain so much about hating American politics.

Not that the complaints don't have merit. I would actually like to see more threads on British, Canadian, Australian or any other politics (although I read only English, so others would be hard to track and read outside articles).
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 12:52 PM on February 9, 2012


Now that Santorum is all over Metafilter and the jokes have gotten crusty, I think it's time to just wash the site clean of him.

Pony request: A button that, when clicked, delivers a fresh baby wipe to my desk.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 12:53 PM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


Obama has literally destroyed my faith in politics

People who continue to believe that Obama is somehow a failure have literally destroyed my faith in the American electorate.
posted by Plutor at 12:57 PM on February 9, 2012 [5 favorites]


Pony request: A button that, when mashed, delivers a fresh baby to wipe my desk.
posted by octobersurprise at 1:02 PM on February 9, 2012 [4 favorites]


People who use the word literally have destroyed my faith in Metafilter.
posted by Justinian at 1:03 PM on February 9, 2012 [2 favorites]


I am literally using the word literally right now.
posted by brain_drain at 1:09 PM on February 9, 2012 [11 favorites]


Obama has literally destroyed my faith in politics

People who continue to believe that Obama is somehow a failure have literally destroyed my faith in the American electorate.


For me it's that it's a melodramatic either/or: Obama is the savior who will completely redeem our nation from all the troubled and corrupt aspects of its history and current politicking; or, he's a totally corrupt sell out who's deserving of nothing but contempt.

It's kind of like imposing the emotional maturity of an adolescent making a judgement on their favorite indy band putting out a record that sells well, onto national politics.
posted by aught at 1:22 PM on February 9, 2012 [3 favorites]


People who use the word literally have destroyed my faith in Metafilter humanity
posted by desjardins at 1:23 PM on February 9, 2012


That's why I'll be voting for one of Obama's opponents this year.

Write in your own name. You are, literally, your own best candidate. No one's ever convinced me why that isn't the ideal solution to this kind of political frustration. No, don't thank me. Just being here for you is thanks enough.
posted by octobersurprise at 1:35 PM on February 9, 2012 [7 favorites]


I can ignore political threads that don't interest me. I can ignore bad Santorum jokes/puns.

I would be happier if Blazecock Pilon and furiousxgeorge wouldn't keep Obamawinning political threads.
posted by Talez at 1:40 PM on February 9, 2012 [3 favorites]


Write in your own name.

No, write in my name.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:40 PM on February 9, 2012


Yeah, right. As if you aren't already history's greatest monster.
posted by octobersurprise at 1:42 PM on February 9, 2012


>>Obama has literally destroyed my faith in politics...
>You are not alone, regardless of those who enjoy rubbing msalt in the wound.


Forgive my attitude. But I took unbelievable amounts of shit from Obama supporters here on Metafilter during the 2008 primaries, just because I expressed mild skepticism about what he might accomplish. So it's a little hard to be sympathetic about this letdown by the same people now.
posted by msalt at 1:43 PM on February 9, 2012 [4 favorites]


I would be happier if Blazecock Pilon and furiousxgeorge wouldn't keep Obamawinning political threads.

I imagine some of you would be much happier if people you didn't like didn't get to say anything at all, when you don't agree with what they say.

But all that aside, I don't even mention him unless he's already part of the discussion, so you can leave me out of your attempt to smear me with that brush, thank you ever so much.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:45 PM on February 9, 2012 [4 favorites]


history's greatest monster.

It's a band name AND a t-shirt!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:53 PM on February 9, 2012


The whole thing was never funny or interesting to me at all. This is also true of a number of hit and cult TV shows.
posted by Lesser Shrew at 1:54 PM on February 9, 2012


I imagine some of you would be much happier if people you didn't like didn't get to say anything at all, when you don't agree with what they say.

You give yourself too much credit when you assume that people give a shit what you think. We're just tired of hearing about it in any vaguely political thread as soon as someone says the "Abraobama" magic word.

But all that aside, I don't even mention him unless he's already part of the discussion, so you can leave me out of your attempt to smear me with that brush, thank you ever so much.

How about you stop threadshitting? Just because other people start it doesn't make it any less obnoxious.

The Prop 8 thread turned to shit because of you and fxg. What should have continued into a celebration of Washington State turned into another toxic "well those Blazecock Pilon and furiousxgeorge fellows sure feel betrayed by Obama" thread.
posted by Talez at 1:55 PM on February 9, 2012 [5 favorites]


Pony request: A button that, when clicked, closes the clicker's account until the election is over.

Yes, I am satisfied with my current Presidential service provider.
posted by anotherpanacea at 1:57 PM on February 9, 2012 [3 favorites]


Yes, I am satisfied with my current Presidential service provider.

Put that on a button and I will buy it.
posted by benito.strauss at 2:03 PM on February 9, 2012 [6 favorites]


What should have continued into a celebration of Washington State turned into another toxic "well those Blazecock Pilon and furiousxgeorge fellows sure feel betrayed by Obama" thread.

Oh bullshit. I had a few comments out of 250+ comment thread, and half of them were about Prop 8. Christ, this lame personal crap never fucking ends. You guys have a 400+ Metatalk post from last week where you can air your garbage, and that's still open. Maybe go there if you need to ruin this thread with this boring shit.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:05 PM on February 9, 2012 [2 favorites]


But all that aside, I don't even mention him unless he's already part of the discussion, so you can leave me out of your attempt to smear me with that brush, thank you ever so much.

It is somewhere between okay and great to be more restrained about pet topics than that. You can mostly decline to mention him even if he has come up in the discussion if there's not some specific new substantial thing to be said. This certainly isn't only a you thing, but you are one of the folks who keeps coming around to that a lot and it'd be nice to have it happen less often in general.

I feel like there's a dynamic in political/ideological discussions on the blue where folks who are hardcore regulars sort of forget that this site isn't just a private chatroom, that discussions in threads aren't just a handful of folks chatting/arguing about the same old thing but rather a place where we've got thousands of less-active but still participating users and a larger still pool of lurkers who enjoy more variety and less rehashes-by-the-same-folks in how threads play out.

And it's a thing where I understand that the regulars are in the place where they hang out and might not have any reason to think about it, but the impact that this sort of here-we-go-again stuff has on everybody else who is not in that tiny core of regulars is important to keep in mind. If you're arguing the same topic on the same points in thread after thread, it has a much bigger effect for the people who aren't you than you might think.

So folks who get into the same arguments again and again (regardless, for god's sake, of who started it it or whatever) need to keep that stuff in mind. Throttling back on it willingly, not getting caught up in yet another go-around of the same old stuff, is a serious favor to the bulk of the membership and readership of this site.
posted by cortex (staff) at 2:08 PM on February 9, 2012 [20 favorites]


This certainly isn't only a you thing, but you are one of the folks who keeps coming around to that a lot and it'd be nice to have it happen less often in general.

I don't bring him up, ever. I am not "one of the folks". Please leave me out of this.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:13 PM on February 9, 2012


You are one of the folks who digs into those conversations, yes, regardless of how it comes up. Again: not just you. But "I don't bring him up" is not the same thing as "I don't participate in arguments about him when he comes up".
posted by cortex (staff) at 2:17 PM on February 9, 2012 [3 favorites]


I don't bring him up, ever. I am not "one of the folks". Please leave me out of this.

You are one of the folks who winds up in threads arguing with the same group of 15-20 other folks in a way that makes the site less appealing and welcoming to the other umpty-thousand members. I'd really prefer not to get into bean counting, but yes you are one of the folks.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 2:20 PM on February 9, 2012 [5 favorites]


Curious Artificer: It's not just us. Today's top headline in the Boston Globe:

SANTORUM SURGE IS TELLING FOR ROMNEY


There are two Santorum posts with the fellow surging in one way or another, the new one, and one from December 30, 2011, which pulled the term from a Philadelphia Daily News blog post. It's not a top headline, but it's on a news website.

In short, we're not breaking any new ground (though we can be more mature than this).
posted by filthy light thief at 2:30 PM on February 9, 2012


Here's a little stroll down hyperbole lane. Boy, did we ever have our Obama goggles on that day.
posted by crunchland at 2:39 PM on February 9, 2012


Talez: "The Prop 8 thread turned to shit because of you and fxg. "

FWIW, BP barely argued with anyone in that thread, and there were a lot of people who were engaging fxg more directly and intensely. If I were going to name people that spun the thread off on an Obama tangent, BP wouldn't even be on my radar.
posted by zarq at 2:39 PM on February 9, 2012 [2 favorites]


OK, the damned "Santorum surge" phrase is all over the news, from Fox (Hannity's page and O'Reilly's page both use the phrase in titles) to Business Insider and The Economist. Even Google used it in a Google Politics & Elections post.

People like patterns, both in previously used phrases and alliteration. Santorum Surge is both.
posted by filthy light thief at 2:39 PM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


I prefer the term "poopsplosion" myself. But it's less alliterative.
posted by zarq at 2:41 PM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


I'd really prefer not to get into bean counting, but yes you are one of the folks.

Well, I did end up doing some bean counting. I looked at a few of the recent pages of my comment history, and there is little or nothing in my history that suggests I'm making every comment in every thread about the guy in the way that is being implied.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:44 PM on February 9, 2012


me: “Politics in general is usually almost insufferable, but listening to liberals raise a hue and cry about how Obama has let them down has gotten to be too painful for me to bear.”

Now I wish I hadn't said this. I found drjimmy11's comment mildly annoying, but certainly not 'too painful to bear.' And I didn't mean this vague drivel of mine to be an insult to anybody who's (perhaps perfectly rightfully) disappointed with Obama's presidency, although of course it does seem like an insult. I hope nobody takes this too seriously, and I'll try not to say such crap about politics in the future. Metafilter actually does politics pretty well, comparatively, and I've been lucky enough to take part in a lot of those discussions.
posted by koeselitz at 2:46 PM on February 9, 2012 [2 favorites]


Thanks, zarq. I appreciate that.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:53 PM on February 9, 2012


Yes, I am satisfied with my current Presidential service provider.

Put that on a button and I will buy it.


On every IRS form, there's a box to check to add money to the presidential campaign.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 2:57 PM on February 9, 2012


But apathy and non-action perpetuate the problem of crappy candidates.

actually, i think voting for the democrat instead of jumping ship and supporting third party candidates is what perpetuates the problem of crappy candidates. obama will be crappy regardless of whether you vote for him, the republican, or stay home. but if you make a big fuss about green party/socialist/whatever guy he'll actually have to compete for your vote.
posted by cupcake1337 at 3:03 PM on February 9, 2012 [2 favorites]


I looked at a few of the recent pages of my comment history, and there is little or nothing in my history that suggests I'm making every comment in every thread about the guy in the way that is being implied.

From a mod perspective, that is not what we are saying. "Every comment in every thread" is not the minimum threshold at which this stuff starts to be distracting; "some of the time, often enough that a lot of people notice it in aggregate" is more what we're talking about, for you and for other users who do this sort of thing. What we are saying is that the folks who get up to these arguments repeatedly, whether starting them or just running with them when someone else goes there, are collectively creating a disruption to other folks' ability to have not-the-exact-same-discussion-again in threads.

It would be great if all involved would make an effort to do less of that; it'd be good if even if everybody isn't making that effort successfully, individuals would make and keep making that effort themselves. That's all; it's not the end of the world or anything, it's just a frustrating dynamic and one that will only get better when people make the effort to not contribute to its perpetuation.
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:03 PM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


makes the site less appealing and welcoming to the other umpty-thousand members.

I may be an outlier, but the arguments and comments in political threads were one of the reasons I stopped lurking and signed up here. The "regulars" actually make this place appealing to me.
posted by Hoopo at 3:06 PM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


Imho, metafilter's single greatest asset is the density of wit relative to rants, opinions, arguments, etc.

I'm fine with people calling out crusty retread humor like the "Santorum surges from behind" title that we covered twice before, but fresh and frothy santorum jokes should always be welcome, even if they're just poop jokes.

I'd expect we'll exhaust the viable phraseology within a month anyways guys, well unless mr. frothy wins the nomination.


I donno if you guys missed the memo, but a 'romney' now officially means a solid one that gets some lube behind it, so it holds back a santorum surge, ala "santorum surge pushes out a romney".

We've gone there enough already recently but it's worth making a mental note for parsing future newspaper articles after he wins the nomination.
posted by jeffburdges at 3:08 PM on February 9, 2012


On every IRS form, there's a box to check to add money to the presidential campaign.

That's for everybody's campaigns for President, not just the current President's. Which is why I never check it.
posted by Sidhedevil at 3:15 PM on February 9, 2012


if you make a big fuss about green party/socialist/whatever guy he'll actually have to compete for your vote.

Clap, you fuckers, clap!

you can leave me out of your attempt to smear me with that brush

You have no idea how delighted I am to see that sentence in a discussion about Santorum.
posted by octobersurprise at 3:15 PM on February 9, 2012


I should say "For both the Democratic and Republican party nominees' campaigns for President," which is obviously not at all synonymous with "everybody". My medication apparently failed Civics.
posted by Sidhedevil at 3:16 PM on February 9, 2012


It takes two to tango in these things. When you call out one side only you make it eminently clear you just want to shut down opposing views.

I enjoy political threads and I will post about my opinion, if every time someone says a negative thing about Obama we need a campaign speech in response we are in a chicken or the egg situation with who caused it and who needs to stop it.

Let me try and illustrate this: The discussion about President Obama's record on same sex marriage wasn't off topic. But the moment it appeared, it was obvious that the thread was not going to return to the original content of the post.

This is Zarq, saying the actual derail in the Prop 8 thread was in response to an on-topic observation about Obama. So, can we ask folks not to make on-topic, truthful statements about the President in political threads because other people will derail off them by turning the thread into a referendum on the entire Obama presidency?

So, Zarq is aware of how these derails happen, and yet...

-
Since we are calling folks out, in the Prop 8 thread, as in a lot of threads like this, Zombieflanders straight up lies or ignores the content of my posts and klang bursts in with personal attacks instead of trying to remain civil. Even as I attempt to moderate the issues with my own posting (In the Washington post and Dancehall posts I did not mention Obama specifically and will otherwise stay out of the thread), I'm not going to ignore things like that. If it leads to noise, it leads to noise.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 3:32 PM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


I'm not going to ignore things like that. If it leads to noise, it leads to noise.

As Isaac Asimov used to say "The Internets is serious business."
posted by octobersurprise at 3:40 PM on February 9, 2012


Frankly, I am surprised that no one has pointed out that "santorum" is an anagram of "a nostrum".

Slackers.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 3:44 PM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


Yes, it's a dirty taint on our good name.
posted by UbuRoivas at 3:49 PM on February 9, 2012 [2 favorites]


As Isaac Asimov used to say "The Internets is serious business."

Happiness is doing it rotten your own way.
-I, Asimov (1994)

posted by furiousxgeorge at 3:51 PM on February 9, 2012


Ya know, one of the great things metafilter has taught me is how to speak less.
posted by By The Grace of God at 3:56 PM on February 9, 2012 [10 favorites]


There's a Greasemonkey script that lets me hide all the Tumblr posts with a whole host of words in them. Is there one of those for MetaFilter?
posted by SMPA at 3:59 PM on February 9, 2012


No. It's built into your browser. Just press Alt-F4.
posted by crunchland at 4:02 PM on February 9, 2012


Thanks for providing that helpful answer.
posted by SMPA at 4:04 PM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


I am disappointed in the way that this callout has deteriorated into a political thread.
posted by Splunge at 4:07 PM on February 9, 2012 [5 favorites]


one of the great things metafilter has taught me is how to speak less.

Same here.
posted by benito.strauss at 4:19 PM on February 9, 2012


Zombieflanders straight up lies or ignores the content of my posts and klang bursts in with personal attacks instead of trying to remain civil. Even as I attempt to moderate the issues with my own posting, I'm not going to ignore things like that.

Why not? Why not just ignore things like that?
posted by msalt at 4:21 PM on February 9, 2012


I literally can't believe I just realized that Rick's given name must be Richard, therefore Dick Santorum seems like a name that should be in play.

But I promise I won't mention it again.

It also took me until I was in my 20s to realize figure out the pun in the Beatles' name. When I describe myself as drunk on language, I mean shitfaced.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:25 PM on February 9, 2012


Why not? Why not just ignore things like that?

Why not ignore people distorting my posts? A good question. In some cases, because when folks engage in this behavior they encourage others not to participate in discussion with me.

msalt: Flunkie: you're wise to disengage furiousxgeorge. He has demonstrated again and again that he will beat his favorite drums and twist facts to do so. Easy example; just now quoting "tens of thousands" of troops planned to remain in Iraq, though the Guardian article he cited said no such thing.

The article was quoting Obama on how many troops would come home by 12/31/2011, and that number included both those he had asked for to remain on bases (approximately 7,000) and the rest of the troops that he had already announced -- in February 2009 -- would come home by that date.


Now, you distorted my original claim:

he had been negotiating to keep potentially tens of thousands of troops there.

I had been very clear that the number was only part of the negotiations and repeatedly cited that after the negotiations the number had gone down.

I backed that original claim up with this link:

As recently as August, Maliki's office was discussing allowing 8,000 to 20,000 U.S. troops to remain until next year, Iraqi Ambassador Samir Sumaida'ie said in an interview with The Cable. He told us that there was widespread support in Iraq for such an extension, but the Obama administration was demanding that immunity for U.S. troops be endorsed by the Iraqi Council of Representatives, which was never really possible.

If not respond to you msalt, what should I do with that? You tell me. Why did you have to post that in the first place?
posted by furiousxgeorge at 4:52 PM on February 9, 2012


I would love to see someone in a televised public forum ask him a question like, "Mr. Santorum, regarding the Keystone Pipeline, can you get behind tighter restrictions on possible leakage of wastes or is that a protection you're not worried about?"
posted by perhapses at 4:52 PM on February 9, 2012 [2 favorites]


I just realized that Rick's given name must be Richard, therefore Dick Santorum seems like a name that should be in play.

Even better? The man who must be Santorum's veep: Dick Mountjoy. I shit you not.
posted by octobersurprise at 4:55 PM on February 9, 2012 [2 favorites]


If not respond to you msalt, what should I do with that? You tell me. Why did you have to post that in the first place?

Do not start up new disputes with people in this thread. MeMail or just leave it alone. Hot button threads turning into just a few commenters doing word-level back and forth arguing with each other is problematic for larger community discussion.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 5:14 PM on February 9, 2012 [5 favorites]


I was asked a question and I answered it.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 5:26 PM on February 9, 2012


furiousxgeorge: "Let me try and illustrate this: The discussion about President Obama's record on same sex marriage wasn't off topic. But the moment it appeared, it was obvious that the thread was not going to return to the original content of the post.

This is Zarq, saying the actual derail...


Um... wait a sec.

I didn't call that a derail, because I don't think it was one. In fact, as you can see I clearly said it was on topic.

A discussion of how the Obama administration and the President himself is addressing (or failing to address) same sex marriage, is on topic in a thread attached to a post about same sex marriage. Not a derail. I referred to the discussion as a tangent, which I thought was a rather straightforward description.

in the Prop 8 thread was in response to an on-topic observation about Obama. So, can we ask folks not to make on-topic, truthful statements about the President in political threads because other people will derail off them by turning the thread into a referendum on the entire Obama presidency?

Yeah, no. As I said, it's not a derail. I do find it annoying when people shill for their pet candidates across multiple political threads that are not directly discussing the election. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in that -- it's one of the reasons why Joe Beese was banned. I express that annoyance by commenting less in threads where it happens.

But I'm not calling for you or anyone else to be silenced. If you disagree, then you obviously haven't been reading very carefully.

So, Zarq is aware of how these derails happen, and yet...

And yet... what? A comment was made and I responded. Are you trying to say I derailed this thread? If so, I did a pretty shitty job, don't you think?
posted by zarq at 5:33 PM on February 9, 2012


Blazecock Pileon: "Thanks, zarq. I appreciate that."

You're very welcome.
posted by zarq at 5:35 PM on February 9, 2012


I just realized that Rick's given name must be Richard, therefore Dick Santorum seems like a name that should be in play.

And this guy would be his ideal running mate.
posted by brain_drain at 5:47 PM on February 9, 2012


Um... wait a sec.

I didn't call that a derail, because I don't think it was one. In fact, as you can see I clearly said it was on topic.

I see what you are saying, I got confused by the 'not returning to the original content of the post' thing. I just see the Obama total referendum as an inevitable part of that since defense of the Obama stance on gay marriage will often point to goals other than gay marriage.

And yet... what? A comment was made and I responded. Are you trying to say I derailed this thread? If so, I did a pretty shitty job, don't you think?

Sorry, what I meant is again that any individual point on Obama can lead to a discussion of his total Presidency. The dude you responded to is disgusted with him, he doesn't say why, so we have to look at the total package. In gay marriage discussions we often look at the risk of losing the total package in an election even when it hasn't been suggested that people don't vote for him, instead of staying on the topic of gay marriage. That discussion may flow from an originally on topic point of view, but it's hard to see it as on-topic when it's a topic you can get to from anywhere Obama's name is mentioned.

I grafted that point on to you inarticulately, sorry for the confusion.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 5:55 PM on February 9, 2012


Y'all knew I'd have something to say about this...

The santorum bit is played.

Sooo played.
posted by Trurl at 6:33 PM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


Let me put my reason for this post into perspective. It's not a "callout" of any member, or a defense of Rick Santorum. It's this:

Remember ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US? I remember it; I'm drinking cocoa out of my AYBABTU mug right now. I still have the T-shirt. But, you know: I don't make jokes like "ALL YOUR REPUBLICAN BASE ARE BELONG TO US" anymore. And I only wear the T-shirt when I wash my car.

Hey, it was great for awhile. Good times. (Remember when FUTURAMA used an ALL YOUR BASE joke? How we laughed!)

But you know, after umpty-ump cups of cocoa, CATS is starting to fade from my mug. And I look upon ALL YOUR BASE jokes with nostalgia.

I would like, soon, very soon, to be able to look back on Rick Santorum with nostalgia. ("Hey! Remember the crazy guy in the sweater vest? Whatever happened to him?")

So, please, could Keyboard Cat just play him off, and let us get on with some new, snark?
posted by SPrintF at 6:42 PM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


The thing is, most people haven't really heard of Santorum yet. These things go in waves as people discover them. Political cartoonists are just catching on so assume the average newspaper reader is just hearing about this. Give it a few months or so at least.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 8:08 PM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


At least this isn't early 90s Usenet where you couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting a nerd who thought constantly quoting Monty Python sketches was the height of wit. Santorum jokes still have a decade or two of overuse to go before they get that bad.
posted by Justinian at 8:22 PM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


If you eat lots of preservative-laden food then your santorum will stay fresh even if the jokes are stale!
posted by Burhanistan at 8:41 PM on February 9, 2012


And now for something completely different.
posted by mazola at 8:58 PM on February 9, 2012




Rick Santorum's full given name is, indeed, Richard. Hoover (that was an autocorrect I like so much I'm keeping it) all the Ricks I've known personally have been Fredericks, just Ricks, or some other unusual name (I think one Rick I knew was formally Rickland, or some other family surname used as a first name).

So don't assume every Rick is also a Dick on the basis of this one indisputable case...
posted by Sidhedevil at 11:08 PM on February 9, 2012 [1 favorite]


If not respond to you msalt, what should I do with that?

You answered your own question before you asked it: Just ignore it. You should just ignore the many provocations you see, that you think are all aimed at you. Just ignore them. Any further questions?
posted by msalt at 12:35 AM on February 10, 2012


No, you ignore my posts.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:39 AM on February 10, 2012


When Santorum stops comparing gay marriage to bestiality, maybe it'll be time to end the frothy mix jokes. Until then, remind yourself of all the voting age humans in the US who think gays want to marry dogs based on Santorum's preaching. Spend your energy fighting the most disgusting of those attitudes.
posted by SakuraK at 1:17 AM on February 10, 2012 [5 favorites]


So, please, could Keyboard Cat just play him off, and let us get on with some new, snark?

Not until the facts on the ground permit it - the thing is, the guy is trying to become president right now. When that stops happening we'll start forgetting him.
posted by Meatbomb at 3:57 AM on February 10, 2012 [5 favorites]


Until then, remind yourself of all the voting age humans in the US who think gays want to marry dogs based on Santorum's preaching.

Does a single one of them read this site?
posted by smackfu at 5:01 AM on February 10, 2012 [1 favorite]


furiousxgeorge: I'm not going to ignore things like that. If it leads to noise, it leads to noise.

Am I the only one reading this as "I need my jollies, so fuck you MetaFilter"? Doesn't really strike me as the best attitude to be applying to the site...
posted by Dysk at 5:01 AM on February 10, 2012 [1 favorite]


Am I the only one reading this as "I need my jollies, so fuck you MetaFilter"?

Nope.
posted by Wolof at 5:06 AM on February 10, 2012


Hey guys, maybe there's a joke in there somewhere about Santorum leaving a bad taste in the mouth? I can't quite get it to work, so I'm just open-sourcing that comic idea. You guys have fun with it.

(Also, hey guys, SOPA? Sounds a bit like SOAP. I'm sure someone could do something with that, right? Better late than never, right? Amazing nobody noticed at the time, really...)
posted by running order squabble fest at 5:25 AM on February 10, 2012 [1 favorite]


Some say, "Stop googlebombing 'Santorum' -
MeFi's not the appropriate forum!"
And that meme "Rick ... Rick ... Rick" - ?
It's moronic. You sick
Fucking assholes don't got no decorum.
posted by the quidnunc kid at 6:07 AM on February 10, 2012 [8 favorites]


I'm not going to ignore things like that. If it leads to noise, it leads to noise.

As cortex and I both said above, we need the people who are often the small set of people who are at the end of threads to find ways to interact with the whole community and not just make 1500 word insult-filled point by point rebuttals that kill threads dead. This is the "noise" we talk about.

Usually MeFi is a place with a medium amount of noise (unlike AskMe which is low noise, and MeTa which is more random) and people seem to work within that okay. However if it's getting to the point where a lot of people are all pointing to a small set of people and saying "This thing you are doing, we'd like you to do less of that, it makes it tough for us to use the site" we need acknowledgement of that.

I understand that it's tough to have discussions about difficult issues that people feel passionately about and not pointedly respond to every comment, but if some people don't either comment slightly less aggressively or slightly less wordily, the thread becomes a referendum on only their opinions and responses, and ceases to be a community discussion. If people can't notice when they're doing this on their own, we're happy to point it out, or the community can point it out here, but we'd much prefer that people dial it back on their own than we wind up arguing about it in MeTa or deleting comments.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:01 AM on February 10, 2012 [1 favorite]


The upshot isn't to stop talking about him, it's that you can in fact mention him, and even talk about his many horrible qualities, without making the same tired poop joke for the millionth time. Hell, I'd be more inclined to take part in these discussions if I didn't have to wade through the noise to find some content.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 7:03 AM on February 10, 2012


If not respond to you msalt, what should I do with that?

Sometimes it's okay to let people be wrong on the Internet.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:34 AM on February 10, 2012 [11 favorites]




furiousxgeorge: "I see what you are saying, I got confused by the 'not returning to the original content of the post' thing. I just see the Obama total referendum as an inevitable part of that since defense of the Obama stance on gay marriage will often point to goals other than gay marriage.

I agree. The thing is, this was a really narrow decision, unique to the situation in California. So I tried to keep the post equally narrow -- didn't try to expand the post itself by mentioning other areas where gay marriage legislation is pending, or how the issue is being addressed elsewhere, because I thought it might be confusing. That's what I meant by the original content of the post.

There are times when it's a good idea to talk about the bigger picture in the body of a post. But that can also turn a post into a complete mess. In this case, I figured people would discuss it in the thread.

Sorry, what I meant is again that any individual point on Obama can lead to a discussion of his total Presidency. The dude you responded to is disgusted with him, he doesn't say why, so we have to look at the total package. In gay marriage discussions we often look at the risk of losing the total package in an election even when it hasn't been suggested that people don't vote for him, instead of staying on the topic of gay marriage. That discussion may flow from an originally on topic point of view, but it's hard to see it as on-topic when it's a topic you can get to from anywhere Obama's name is mentioned.

Yes, but not every mention of the man needs to turn into a discussion of his total Presidency, either. Perhaps I'm seeing something that isn't there, but that seems to be happening more and more in political threads.

I grafted that point on to you inarticulately, sorry for the confusion."

No problem. Thanks for explaining.
posted by zarq at 8:56 AM on February 10, 2012


EmpressCallipygos: Sometimes it's okay to let people be wrong on the Internet.

How straight was your face when you typed that?
posted by gman at 9:10 AM on February 10, 2012 [5 favorites]


Yes, it's a dirty taint on our good name.

No, more like an Orly Taitz.
posted by evilmidnightbomberwhatbombsatmidnight at 9:43 AM on February 10, 2012


How straight was your face when you typed that?

Chill, gman, I think Empress may have turned over a new leaf.
posted by grouse at 10:00 AM on February 10, 2012


Agreed.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:04 AM on February 10, 2012


It's always harder to do in practice than in theory, but it's certainly something to aim for, and to support in others.

People aren't going to de-douche if you can only prove that they are wrong, after all. They're usually just going to douche harder.
posted by running order squabble fest at 10:10 AM on February 10, 2012 [1 favorite]


running order squabble fest: " People aren't going to de-douche if you can only prove that they are wrong, after all. They're usually just going to douche harder."

Now there's a mental image....
posted by zarq at 10:15 AM on February 10, 2012


I have to say, the more Rick Santorum says these ridiculous, horribly offensive statements in public, the more I like Dan Savage's definition.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:20 AM on February 10, 2012 [2 favorites]


grouse: Chill, gman, I think Empress may have turned over a new leaf.

I'm cool with that. I mean, she's trotted that same line out two other times lately, but anyway, no one will be happier to be wrong about this than me.
posted by gman at 10:22 AM on February 10, 2012


No, you ignore my posts.

What are you, 12? Take some responsibility for your actions. You don't have to respond to anything. Ever. You're being asked nicely by every single person to not keep fighting with a small group of people, to the point where it hijacks threads.

Maybe you haven't noticed, but not one person is defending you in this discussion.

Yes, most of us (in this thread) fall into the fighty trap from time to time, me as much as anybody. But we can all walk away. Every time. Watch -- I'm walking away right now.
Bye! Don't forget to chill out!
posted by msalt at 10:34 AM on February 10, 2012


WRONGNESS QUOTIENT AT MAXIMAL THRUST, CAPTAIN

*BEEP BEEP BEEP*

COMMENCING EMERGENCY DE-DOUCHE PROTOCOL IN T MINUS 5 SECONDS

*BEEP BEEP BEEP*

SANTORUM FLAPS EJECTING DOUCHE-SMEGMA

*BEEP BEEP BEEP*

IT HAS BEEN A PLEASURE SERVING WITH YOU, CAPTAIN

*BEEP BEEP BEEP*

SOMETIMES I WONDER, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WEREN'T A STAR FLEET CAPTAIN AND I WASN'T A DISIMBODIED SHIP'S COMPUTER VOICEOVER, MAYBE WE COULD HAVE BEEN MORE THAN FRIENDS OR SOMETHING, I DON'T KNOW BUT I JUST WONDER THAT'S ALL

*BEEP BEEP BEEP*

DOUCHE LEVELS CRITICAL. I GUESS THIS IS PROBABLY A GOOD A TIME AS ANY TO ADMIT THAT IT WAS ME THAT "ACCIDENTALLY" EJECTED YOUR WIFE OUT OF THE AIRLOCK THAT TIME

*BEEP BEEP BEEP*
posted by the quidnunc kid at 10:38 AM on February 10, 2012 [3 favorites]


What are you, 12? Take some responsibility for your actions. You don't have to respond to anything. Ever. You're being asked nicely by every single person to not keep fighting with a small group of people, to the point where it hijacks threads.

Maybe you haven't noticed, but not one person is defending you in this discussion.

Yes, most of us (in this thread) fall into the fighty trap from time to time, me as much as anybody. But we can all walk away. Every time. Watch -- I'm walking away right now.
Bye! Don't forget to chill out!


I think I've learned over time that there's a difference between "walking away" and "trying to get the last word by saying a bunch of insulting things and then running away". It's not always clear to oneself which a particular act is, I think, but it's something I am trying to be mindful of in myself.
posted by running order squabble fest at 11:24 AM on February 10, 2012 [4 favorites]


Good point except you just threw in 2 digs yourself ("running away"?)
Lucky for you I already walked away and am not responding! Oh, wait....
posted by msalt at 12:38 PM on February 10, 2012


As I say, it's hard to be perfect in these situations. All one can do is seek to avoid escalating, acknowledge where there are problems, try to defuse.

So, I understand that you felt insulted, and I can see why. "Running away" was there as a counterpoint to "walking away" - the phrase you used, which was itself metaphorical. It sought to describe metaphorically the action of seeking to get out of the radius of a response after delivering a parting shot and then declaring that you were no longer going to be a part of the discussion. As you just demonstrated, the problem with this model is that it's very hard actually to get that amount of distance, because the page is still one click away. Unless you add it to your blocked list, anyway, or immediately disable your account. So, that kind of response - some insults, followed by a statement that you are no longer arguing - kind of falls down, because a) it sort of still is arguing.

Of course, you're free to disregard all this - I mean, who am I to offer advice? I guess that I'm trying to see how this works after I got quite temperamental last week (I'd say I was provoked, but then I would, wouldn't I? and provoked isn't justified).
posted by running order squabble fest at 1:23 PM on February 10, 2012


No, you ignore my posts.

What are you, 12?


I don't appreciate being lectured at to ignore stuff by someone who refuses to practice that act and takes the oppurtunity to take digs at me. In the conversation I linked above my response to your distortion was a simple: I think that if you avoid twisting my words you will find that I stated both what the Pentagon and Administration wanted and that negotiations with the Iraqis ended with lower numbers, and I have provided supporting links.

I find that to be an entirely reasonable response to your misstatements and urging of others not to speak with me. I find the request not to post that response to be unreasonable. If the ideal is simply ignoring everything we don't like, practice what you preach so I can save time on typing out perfectly reasonable responses.

As cortex and I both said above, we need the people who are often the small set of people who are at the end of threads to find ways to interact with the whole community and not just make 1500 word insult-filled point by point rebuttals that kill threads dead.

Do you have any specific recent insult filled posts of mine you have an issue with? I think when I am insulted I have been trying to handle it gracefully. For instance it was recently suggested I was high on drugs, sanctimonious, and thought Obama was a murderer. I did not respond back with insults, simply replied to the actual points in the post.

I've also been accused of trolling and have simply replied "Please address my points, the ones I actually write, and avoid calling me a troll."

Now, entirely separate of these issues, I do go back and forth too much in arguing politics stuff but in general but insults and distortions are a different category. They tend to be so rarely directed at me in the blue that I don't expect they will be a noise generator since I do not respond in kind.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 2:22 PM on February 10, 2012 [1 favorite]


Do you have any specific recent insult filled posts of mine you have an issue with? I think when I am insulted I have been trying to handle it gracefully. For instance it was recently suggested I was high on drugs, sanctimonious, and thought Obama was a murderer. I did not respond back with insults, simply replied to the actual points in the post.

I would ask the same question.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:26 PM on February 10, 2012


it was recently suggested I was high on drugs, sanctimonious, and thought Obama was a murderer.

A sanctimonious, Obama-murderin-thinkin, druggie? Why, back in my day, that'd be a whuppin'.
posted by octobersurprise at 2:41 PM on February 10, 2012


And in some circles, it'd be an endorsement.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 3:02 PM on February 10, 2012


"Running away" was there as a counterpoint to "walking away". It sought to describe metaphorically the action of seeking to get out of the radius of a response after delivering a parting shot and then declaring that you were no longer going to be a part of the discussion.

Fair enough. Let's face it, though, a lot of this is about pride. "Running away" seems to imply striking someone, then fleeing fair retribution. Besides being less than an honorable response, this isn't really possible online. Even if you don't read the topic further, your opponent can still attack you and land blows.

We can stop responding, with or without "last points" on the way out. Obviously the fewer cheap shots on exit the more graceful. Sometimes nothing is the best response, but I'm not sure it always is -- it can be useful to publicly disengage, or say something like "this is getting personal, let's agree to disagree" etc.
posted by msalt at 3:10 PM on February 10, 2012


One day, I was in a bar in Asheville, NC. I had been sitting next to a guy who was a total anarchist - he carried a copy of the Constitution in his pocket. He was quite surprised when I quoted the 9nth Amendment to him.

He was a bit squicky, saying how he thought it would be great if someone hit the capitol and anarchy and all that. I said, "but what about the people who would get killed?" And he replied that it would be worth it if the government was brought down.

This was about a week before 9/11.

I moved away from him and sat at a table with a few other folks. Was talking with a woman and her husband. They were lawyers. Both dedicated to reversing the Death Penalty. I listened to them and I was very moved.

When the woman got up to leave, she stood behind me and draped her silver necklace over me. It felt like a blanket of love.

"Here. This is for you," she said.

I have never forgotten that moment: the moment where another human being gave me something from their soul, to lift me up. She was so kind, this woman, and she and her husband were so dedicated in their work. A kind word or gesture lasts a lifetime, and everybody needs a hugs.

Santorum: I don't care about him one way or the other. The Dems will win and the rest is just gravy, and I drape my virtual silver necklace over all of you, because despite the weirdness, it really will be all right, guys and gals.
posted by Marie Mon Dieu at 3:47 PM on February 10, 2012 [3 favorites]


One day, I was in a bar in Asheville, NC. I had been sitting next to a guy who was a total anarchist - he carried a copy of the Constitution in his pocket.

Used to be a guy like this in a bar I frequented. He finally got turfed for being a little too "constitutional" with the women who worked there.
posted by octobersurprise at 4:25 PM on February 10, 2012


This is the part of the story where they're all mad at each other. Later, they will realize that they are really IN LOVE! Awwww!
posted by SPrintF at 4:25 PM on February 10, 2012


This must be the airing of grievances thread.
posted by Hoopo at 5:03 PM on February 10, 2012


I have a copy of the Constitution on my phone. Does that make me a bad person?
posted by Splunge at 5:43 PM on February 10, 2012


Depends. Android or iPhone?
posted by running order squabble fest at 5:49 PM on February 10, 2012 [4 favorites]


Silver? SILVER?! If you really loved us, you shell out for a gold necklace.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:26 PM on February 10, 2012


I was going to say, you should change the Meta note to "Everyone needs a silver necklace of love," but actually everybody would think that means something dirty.
posted by msalt at 8:46 PM on February 10, 2012


Silver, pearls, and santorum. Or any given Friday night.
posted by Burhanistan at 9:07 PM on February 10, 2012


Well, I'll just leave this here.
posted by zennish at 9:55 PM on February 10, 2012 [2 favorites]


One day, I was in a bar in Asheville, NC. I had been sitting next to a guy who was a total anarchist - he carried a copy of the Constitution in his pocket.

I think there's a word that either you or he is confused about.
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:04 AM on February 11, 2012 [7 favorites]


So, I often say stupid things -- hell, my posting history is evidence of that. Sometimes it happens in real-time.

But I wanted to know if any of the kids in my comp class knew about Santorum (jc freshmen). None of them did. I'd assumed one would, then that person could clue other students in, so that I wouldn't get fired for talking about fecal froth.

So I explained the history and found a way to explain it without the words 'fecal' and 'froth' or 'ejaculate.' Really, all I had to say is by-product from gay sex and then SANTORUM SURGES FROM BEHIND.

Now there is not one student who does not know a) Santorum hates gay people and b) political protest can lead to poop jokes. I feel my job is done. Which is good, because I may not get assigned another class, ever.
posted by angrycat at 6:32 AM on February 11, 2012 [5 favorites]


Obama has literally destroyed my faith in politics

Faith in politics is exactly the damn problem. I prefer faith remain out of politics.

Although to be less literal, I don't know why one would have "faith" in something as abstract as "politics." The opposite of politics is what? As far as I know, the answer is "violence."
posted by spitbull at 1:35 PM on February 11, 2012 [2 favorites]


Obama has literally destroyed my faith in politics

I suspect what he has destroyed is your faith in heroes. And like I said on the eve of his election, 'people who look for heroes to save them get bent across the barrel and fucked, inevitably, every time'.

I hate to say I told you so, but I did, by baal's hairy balls.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:16 PM on February 11, 2012 [1 favorite]




Looks like someone is trying to pull the Santorum prank on Mittens.

'Romney' means defecate? Candidate facing a Santorum search problem.
posted by ericb at 1:42 PM on February 13, 2012


Wow, I'm surprised Google can be so easily manipulated even today. Spreadingromney is my #7 result for "romney".

I think it's mainly because the pool of possible links is so thin for these guys. Once you get past their official page, their twitter page, their FB page, and their wikipedia entry, what else is there that is really a good general result for a simple name search?
posted by smackfu at 1:45 PM on February 13, 2012


It even briefly made the frontpage. It's really stupid, even if Romney is a shitbag.
posted by Burhanistan at 1:50 PM on February 13, 2012 [1 favorite]


You're gonna need a time machine back to before he made the national stage to make that work.
posted by Artw at 1:55 PM on February 13, 2012




Heh. I just came in here to post that Santorum gun ad.
posted by Burhanistan at 1:42 PM on February 15, 2012


Celebrity impersonators. Incongruous cheery martial tunes. Poop jokes.

God? I know I don't pretend to talk to you very much, but, please. I have to put up with this whole election stuff no matter what. Please, please, let this be the new mold from which the rest of the primary season's attack ads will be cast. I would appreciate it.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:52 PM on February 15, 2012


Incongruous cheery martial tunes.

It was this aspect that made watching it seem so acid-trippy. Plus the really fecal-like squashing splats of the mud.
posted by angrycat at 4:14 PM on February 15, 2012


Santorum receives coveted Megadeath endorsement. (Though "'Stain follows Santorum isn't too surprising.)
posted by octobersurprise at 8:16 PM on February 15, 2012


« Older DoppelMetaGangers   |   Quiz Me Newer »

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