Internet community or "flame the newbie"?

June 10, 2002 12:46 PM

Internet community? Or the lightning round of flame the newbie?
posted by PrinceValium to Etiquette/Policy at 12:46 PM (22 comments total)

Come on, people. It's a website. At least practice being nice to each other. As a deity once said, Flame unto others as you would have them flame unto you.
posted by PrinceValium at 12:48 PM on June 10, 2002

"Flame unto others as you would have them flame unto you."

I think it was the Human Torch that said that.
posted by mikhail at 12:56 PM on June 10, 2002

By the same token, he's been a member of the community for nine months...not really newbie baiting. :) Granted, some people don't understand the basics of how the press operates, but the information he was asking for was available on the site...and follows the conventions of standard print press operations. Rather than do the research, he asked the community to do the research for him...or so it was perceived by the people who responded crankily.

Also, it's Monday, everyone seems a little testier on Monday...I dunno why.
posted by dejah420 at 12:56 PM on June 10, 2002

That's Monday(TM). Please do better next time.
posted by DaRiLo at 1:07 PM on June 10, 2002

everyone seems a little testier on Monday...I dunno why.

sigma7: I don't like Mondays
dejah420: Everyone hates Mondays.
Skot: If You Feel Like Shit, It Must Be Monday
posted by Marquis at 1:09 PM on June 10, 2002

he's been a member of the community for nine months...not really newbie baiting

True, but those first couple front-page posts (its his second) are excruciatingly frightening - like being thrown naked into the spotlight.

Old-timers should be much more gentle, offering a guiding hand not a slap. I dont think I would have continued posting if I had received a comment like dhartungs. F**k'em, I would have said.
posted by vacapinta at 1:15 PM on June 10, 2002

dhartung's snarkiness was probably excessive, but I'll admit I was thinking the same thing when I read the post.
posted by rcade at 1:30 PM on June 10, 2002

i think you can criticize a posting on its thread, as long as it's to the point of the topic. i don't care for camworld's "oh pity I; metafilter is shit and my time is best spent elsewhere." that kind of comment says nothing but "this sucks" and is useless. i don't think i'd be so harsh as dan, though, and i think you've a point in saying dan shouldn't have been so self-righteous. norton's post probably didn't help either, though it was well-intentioned. maybe the best solution is simply to augment the thread without passing judgment? add the links and the information you have and move on.
posted by moz at 1:35 PM on June 10, 2002

Heh, I am a person who has seen numerous flames towards people. Granted, some of the ones thrown my way were deserving, but others were not. All too often I had seen people being flamed for no good reason other than people know they can get away with it.

The problem is that yes, we have a screen name, but it still remains that it is just that. Not too many people actually know who I really am, so why not just voice my opinion? After all what can happen to me here? I could get put in time out, I could get banned, but none to often does any actually action take place for someone flaming someone.
posted by thebwit at 1:44 PM on June 10, 2002

Flaming has been around since the beginning of time, but one constant law has been that a single flame begets a flame war of epic proportions. Point being, Dhartung ruined what might have been an interesting thread. All it really needed was for Matt to remove the Metafilter link at the beginning of the post - or better yet, for us to ignore the faux pas and just discuss the topic!

thebwit - You are right. Here, our screen names can be alter egos for either our naked aggression or our experimental intellect. Which one of these options makes Mefi a better website?
posted by PrinceValium at 2:00 PM on June 10, 2002

Also, by newbie I took into account the user's limited posting history, as well as his join date of 9/12/01 (fairly or unfairly, the date makes for an inherent typecast.)
posted by PrinceValium at 2:02 PM on June 10, 2002

dhartung ruined what might have been an interesting thread.

Says you. Says I, the thread was started on a fallacy. He pointed it out and threw in a "considerate" jab. Is dhartung a problem poster? Has he had trouble in the past expressing himself without personal attacks?

Final question, and most relevant, did we really need a MeTa thread for this?
posted by BlueTrain at 2:13 PM on June 10, 2002

As much as you needed to contribute to it, BlueTrain.
posted by rcade at 2:22 PM on June 10, 2002

Ain't that clever...
posted by BlueTrain at 2:33 PM on June 10, 2002

Final question, and most relevant, did we really need a MeTa thread for this?

I just love the domino flow from questioning the need for a mefi post to the need for it's meta counterpart.

PrinceValium, I would like others to do onto me not too much different than dhartung's rather easy treatment, considering what has gone before in the name of curtailing front post foolishness (FPF.)
posted by john at 2:34 PM on June 10, 2002

Uncharacteristically harsh of Dan, but the point is valid. I cringe at the use of FPP, though. Overall, I'd say they were both 50% wrong.
posted by anildash at 2:48 PM on June 10, 2002

dhartung's snarkiness was probably excessive, but I'll admit I was thinking the same thing when I read the post.
same here


posted by matteo at 3:52 PM on June 10, 2002

I'll throw some pennies into the jar (just along with the consensus really).

The post sucked.

dhartung's comment stung like a mother.

Them's the breaks, tho. If you can't stand the heat, stay the fuck off the front page.

is it ok to use the f-word in a post? I see it sparingly, but is there a general "pg-13" rating that we should adhere to?
posted by zpousman at 6:46 PM on June 10, 2002

I think it makes you sound like Sargeant Slaughter, zpousman, but if you're OK with that, fir away.
posted by Kafkaesque at 6:55 PM on June 10, 2002

I guess if "fuckwit" is appropriate, then plain 'ol fuck is as well. I don't like to see it too much because it can be a crutch for lazy writing and overuse tends to make one sound like a dumbass 15 year old. But a bit of it is fine. Your use is masterful.
posted by evanizer at 6:55 PM on June 10, 2002

um. Fire away.

I have no problem with our friends the trees.
posted by Kafkaesque at 6:55 PM on June 10, 2002

Ay yi yi. Well, whatever I said (I don't exactly recall), it was intended as a sigh and an eye-roll. I thought the "please do better next time" showed that it wasn't meant harshly. Without piling on further, I'll simply concur that as BlueTrain said, it was based on a fallacy.

The greater point being, a thorough reading of one's own source, a good link to that source {and there have been quite a few really useless links lately, e.g. in the Havrilesky thread and some of the breaking terror and sports news items}, and a quick google to find out the zeitgeist {hey! there's this one company that's snapping up almost all the worthwhile content} could have resulted in a truly worthwhile post about DRM and outsourcing in online news. That's what I'd hope to do myself when faced with a similar question, and in general this site succeeds at encouraging the same for all front-page posts.
posted by dhartung at 10:58 PM on June 10, 2002