FPP link-burdened to the point of undiscussability? October 17, 2002 2:58 PM   Subscribe

Is it just me, or does this FPP contain so many links on such a variety of issues as to be 'undiscussable'. Thats likely not even a word, but you get my drift.
posted by schlyer to Etiquette/Policy at 2:58 PM (12 comments total)

And that's a bad thing, why?
posted by Wulfgar! at 2:59 PM on October 17, 2002


Wait, where's the filtering part?
posted by Stan Chin at 3:13 PM on October 17, 2002

well, there's a lot of stuff in there, but MeFi should be primarily about the links
Maybe the FPP could have been split in two, say 5 or 6 lines in the FP, the rest inside. Better editing, maybe.
But it is good, Uberposts like this should not be a problem. Linkless / trollish / Farkish / MonsterFilter posts are the problem (they usually originate pancakes, cat's breaths, zippity bops and other weird MeFi creatures)

posted by matteo at 3:39 PM on October 17, 2002

Oh, and they make the Baby Jesus cry

posted by matteo at 3:39 PM on October 17, 2002

Wulfgar: Is this MetaFilter or MetaEverythingIReadTodayOnTheWeb?
posted by rcade at 4:04 PM on October 17, 2002

Obviously, its MetaFilter. And concidering that that post was thematic, refering to it as "MetaEverythingIReadTodayOnTheWeb" is a weak and lazy characterization of it. Beyond that, I refer you to matteo.
posted by Wulfgar! at 4:12 PM on October 17, 2002

Hey -- give the man a break.

Too many links are better than too few, as too obscure a link is better than too mundane.

Sure, it's over the top. Sure, no discussion could ever touch all the points made in all these articles -- but Metafilter is about the links first and the discussion second. I clicked on a few of these and learned a few things. That's enough for me.

To me it's a "worldview" post. Maybe not one I agree with wholeheartedly, but I think that this post is the least of our worries. If every MF post turned into this, we'd probably be *better* off, instead of worse. As Matteo points out, it's the other extreme that makes the pastel suit jackals go nuts.

I do concede rcade's point: I use metafilter as a filter on the web. So I heartily encourage everyone to think about filtering more and posting less (a filter is useful for what it lets through and what it does not let through). I'm also not a big fan of pointing us to other metafilter threads without any reason for doing so. Sure, the sky is falling, but using metafilter threads as your evidence is circular and just plain wierd.

posted by zpousman at 4:27 PM on October 17, 2002

matteo's point is good, as positively all the links may scare some folks away. Depending on someone's system it may take a few days to open the links. I did have trouble keeping track of my thoughts so I reviewed the comments and saw none of matteo's creatures. Yes, the comments lead me to want to follow up with the post at a better time. Also, I have noticed other posts that could be two, but then again some could should be combined.

No middle road sometimes in Meta-filter so floor it and let it rip, otherwise you'll never know.

Anyone ever try pulling together more than one member to get a FPP with both sides to a story?

PS, matteo, I wanted to capitalize you, arrggg, so here MATTEO,I'm not yelling ;P

posted by thomcatspike at 4:39 PM on October 17, 2002

I think the FPP in question was downright y2karl-esque in its multi-linked beauty. Yes, it takes some work to get through, but when done with care, as I think this was, it's a great experience.
posted by Ty Webb at 5:18 PM on October 17, 2002

I never intended to visit all the links. I read the first and the last, then called it a day. I assumed the glut of linked text was "the point" of the post, i.e. a response to the "what planet are you from" ad absurdum.
posted by Hildago at 5:30 PM on October 17, 2002

I thought that seething mass of links tell a rather pointed story (not all of them, just most of them): the Bush adm. drive for war on Iraq, and it's new "Pax Americana", "preemptive strike" policy have so concerned establishment insiders that a surprising number of them have chosen to put their careers or reputations on the line to speak out against the vector of George W. Bush's foreign policies. Some have done this - Tony Zinni included - in such an outspoken way as to prevent their future employment with a (possible) Bush administration in 2004.

I did, however, nearly spit out a cup of coffee laughing over Soyjoy's comment: "Yo, folks, stop raggin' on troutfishing for the size and density of the post! If you mouseover it in random directions you can generate your own lo-tech version of a scene from Close Encounters of the Third Kind!



The careers of a number of long term establishment insiders are wrapped up in the comments linked to in this post. My point? -- they are gambling in a BIG way, and with HIGH stakes. Ergo, they must have very strong feelings about this.

I do not think this is "business as usual", but representative of a pivotal decision the US is committing itself to.

I find this significant. I hope others do too.

Meanwhile.....I've been pushing the [planet “genetically targeted weapons as politically usefull tools and perception reengineering via nanobots, psychedelic drugs and valium”] point for while now. Histrionic, yes. But what the hell is Wolfowitz thinking? Is he on drugs?

And I think the Neoconservatives' call for an American Empire needs more, rather than less, exposure. If we are going to declare EMPIRE, lets do it in the open light of day.

PS - the "origins of fascism in the US" is deadly serious. This largely forgotten chapter of recent US history has had a pronounced effect on our goverment. Ignore it to your peril....

posted by troutfishing at 8:27 PM on October 17, 2002

"MeFi is not a discussion board."

... as has been quoted at me numerous times. ;-P

posted by mischief at 10:11 PM on October 17, 2002

« Older Don't derail to recommend me a different browser   |   Textad display problem Newer »

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