Informative, but... November 13, 2002 2:22 PM   Subscribe

Welcome to "Me"tafilter.
posted by Wulfgar! to Etiquette/Policy at 2:22 PM (51 comments total)

Some amusing links, informative in a missionary kinda way, and IMO, altogether misplaced at MetaFilter. Yes, it is an informative post, and I kinda like it, but I really think we ought to be discouraging this kind of "here's what I believe, am interested in, and want to show you, regardless of the forum" posts. Though I wouldn't go so far as to say "Get your own blog, (you know the rest)" I do believe this opens the door to googling anything that some might not know about and posting it here (then moderating it unmercifully though with humor) just because you think its cool. Is this about the web, or about a user's pet interests? Please discuss.
posted by Wulfgar! at 2:23 PM on November 13, 2002


I do believe this opens the door to googling anything that some might not know about and posting it here

Thank you for bringing this up, wulfgar! This has been happening for at least the last month lately. MeFi has gone from, "here's a cool link, and maybe some background info" to "here's today's lesson on ___. I used google and found a bunch of stuff."

I'm sure there's some interesting stuff, but the Front Page seems too much like, "look how many links I found on a subject. Aren't i cool?"

I'm sure there's something i'd find interesting in there, but nothing that I couldn't have found via google. I think we need a word opposite of pancakes for this new phenomenon. Maybe flapjacks.

Anybody like flapjacks?
posted by Ufez Jones at 2:31 PM on November 13, 2002


I'm sure there's something i'd find interesting in there, but nothing that I couldn't have found via google.

You could find, say, anything at all that exists on the internet on google. If that's how you qualify a good post, we must be batting pretty close to .000 ;)

I get the gist of your point, but--as with all posts on MeFi--if it's done well, it works. An example would be the thread about self-made submarines a few weeks ago, which was fantastic.

I don't know what you can do to combat this issue, because it's probably even more subjective than what makes a good one-link post.
posted by The God Complex at 2:35 PM on November 13, 2002


I see what you're saying, God Complex, but I think it's become a peacock show of sorts lately. Does there need to be a limit to the number of links in a post? No, of course not. But doing it for the fuck's sake of it seems so brazenly ostentatious. This is MetaFilter, not EssayFilter.
posted by Ufez Jones at 2:37 PM on November 13, 2002


It's also the moderation of the thread that's grating, as Mr Davis pointed out.
posted by Kafkaesque at 2:39 PM on November 13, 2002


Is this a personal post, or a viral advertisement for the LDS? The way it's becoming a question and answer session reminds me of missionaries. The whole post almost reminds me of the Nike commercial a few days ago.
posted by elwoodwiles at 2:44 PM on November 13, 2002


I didn't post the information for the purpose of converting or convincing anyone, and I didn't realize that commenting a thread I had posted was considered "moderating".

I had collected some interesting links pertaining to my religion, and I posted them, along with some other links with some background information. I was interested in the conversation, so I posted some comments.

I'm still learning what makes a good post.

I promise that next time, I'll submit a single link, posted on Fark at least a few days previously, that links to a vaguely amusing flash animation or something similar. :-)
posted by oissubke at 2:52 PM on November 13, 2002


The rule of thumb I'm adopting is that multi-link posts (and I used to love them) are only acceptable if the first of the links could stand alone as an interesting post.
posted by Hildago at 2:55 PM on November 13, 2002


I had collected some interesting links pertaining to my religion, and I posted them, along with some other links with some background information. I was interested in the conversation, so I posted some comments

oissubke, let me change one word and see how it plays:

"I had collected some interesting links pertaining to my religion company, and I posted them, along with some other links with some background information. I was interested in the conversation, so I posted some comments"

What if the post looked like this?

We're not Reebok or Converse (I've known many who lumped the three of us Shoe Companies together). We're not a cult -- though there are some strange connections with Spike Lee and Michael Jordan. We have beautiful but "mysterious" stores around the world. We have a fascinating history, but we're not old fashioned. We're silly, sometimes very silly, but we're also serious and sincere when the time comes. Who are we? We're Nike -- and proud of it.

That's how I read the LDS post, and why I'd prefer to delete it.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 3:00 PM on November 13, 2002 [1 favorite]


I have defended the LDS church many times in my little stint at MetaFilter, even though I find it theologically repugnant. The problem here is that there does indeed seem to be an agenda, accompanied by a friendly smile and firm handshake, and gee don't ya'll find this stuff interesting now. All in all, I find this a worthy topic for discussion, but I thought we'd figured out by now that MetaFilter is not a discussion forum, but rather a forum for filtering the new and unusual on the web, and discussing that.

On preview, oissubke, I have done everything possible not to make this personal or attack what you have presented or your beliefs (though I'm actually well qualified to do so). My concerns are venue of presentation, not quality of the presenter. Don't be gettin' all defensive now.
posted by Wulfgar! at 3:00 PM on November 13, 2002


a vaguely amusing flash animation
hey! that's MY religion yer bashin' now!
posted by quonsar at 3:07 PM on November 13, 2002


FWIW oissubke, I loved your 'unknown places' posts (where they now?) but Matt seems to have put his finger on exactly what tickled my throat in the first place. (?!)
posted by i_cola at 3:08 PM on November 13, 2002


Ufez Jones you say, This is MetaFilter, not EssayFilter.
But how else to win my pony :P
posted by thomcatspike at 3:10 PM on November 13, 2002


What i_cola said.
posted by LittleMissCranky at 3:13 PM on November 13, 2002


I didn't post the information for the purpose of converting or convincing anyone...


Come on oissubke, peddle that line to the rubes down the street, but don't expect those of us in the know to buy it. ;)

The LDS church has been doing viral marketing before there even was a name for it. (Actually they like to call is "Q&A," or "planting the seed.") An oft heard phrase in Mormon circles is," Every member a missionary," and they are great at it. It's quite impressive, really. That's what you were doing, oissubke, and your bishop would be very proud of you.

That said, there were some interesting links in your post. As a survivor of the "singles ward" phenomenon myself, I can totally see how there would be tons of comic potential there.
posted by edlark at 3:14 PM on November 13, 2002


That's how I read the LDS post, and why I'd prefer to delete it.

Matt, you're the first one of this people to make a lick of sense, and I hate to say it but I agree with you.

The twelfth article of faith says "We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law."

And on MeFi, that means Matt. Delete away.
posted by oissubke at 3:20 PM on November 13, 2002


I never ever ever thought I would find myself saying this about an innapropriate post, but that one I might have kept just for the links in the thread itself.

Matt's will be done.
posted by Wulfgar! at 3:26 PM on November 13, 2002


I blame y2karl. Well, not really, but his multi-link posts are interesting and informative, and lead others to want to emulate. Some of them aren't very good immitators.

Oissubke, I thought your post was pretty good, but aspects of the CoLDS ("colds," heh) has been covered a number of times on MetaFilter. Beyond that, the number of comments you posted within the thread (8/30-something when I clicked over here, now 9/54) look more like moderation than simple interested discussion. It seemed also like you were trying to stifle any negative discussion by actively responding to nearly every comment posted. While I understand that impulse --I was once accused of post-tending, too -- it's contrary to the nature of this site. It's hard when you're so close to a subject, but you've got to be careful not to participate to the point of stifling the thread.

On preview, I agree with Matt, and i_cola, and I'm glad you do, too.
posted by me3dia at 3:26 PM on November 13, 2002


I blame y2karl

So do I, on almost a daily basis. :-)
posted by oissubke at 3:28 PM on November 13, 2002


I disagree. I'm not sure that enforcing objectivity is necessarily a good thing. The post was obviously pro-LDS, but the comments are open to anyone and good arguments were made on both sides. If someone shilled for Nike, any Reebok guy with a Metafilter account could have owned the discussion with some thought-out arguments.

Edlark, viral marketing is only as effective as its audience is receptive. Anyone's free to cry bullshit on an open forum. The poster assumes the responsibility of the reputation of his/her words and that includes the reactions of others.
posted by PrinceValium at 3:29 PM on November 13, 2002


So, where's the next stop on oissubke's world tour? Not Salt Lake City, I hope. ;)
posted by me3dia at 3:33 PM on November 13, 2002


I disagree. I'm not sure that enforcing objectivity is necessarily a good thing.

Prince, it's not that people should be absolutely 100% objective, but there is a balance. I can post links to interesting bits I find off various EFF and tech/politics lists I'm on because I believe in those issues, but I try to handle it carefully, and not be completely overt in cheerleading something (if there is a new DMCA-like law, I might say "Here's this new thing, is it worse than the last?" instead of "OH MY GOD, call your congresscritter now and OPPOSE THIS VILE GARBAGE").

I can't draw the line on a piece of paper between interested contributor and advertising shill, but oissubke's post was over it.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 3:37 PM on November 13, 2002


"If someone shilled for Nike, any Reebok guy with a Metafilter account could have owned the discussion with some thought-out arguments."

Which is of course the best part of Metafliter. I think that sort of thing is why we all keep coming back. PR and marketing folks spinning facts and defending the company line.

If only we could have more links that promoted that sort of thing for religious and political discussions. Two agenda loving thumbs up for that idea PrinceValium.
posted by y6y6y6 at 3:38 PM on November 13, 2002


So, where's the next stop on oissubke's world tour? Not Salt Lake City, I hope. ;)

Well, I had been planning on Iceland (I'm obsessed with Iceland), but someone else had a great Iceland post just then and stole my thunder, and the whole thing fell apart after that. I'll take another shot at it as soon as my 24 hours of repentance is up. ;-)
posted by oissubke at 3:38 PM on November 13, 2002


Mormons peddle their religion door to door like Avon salespersons, so it's really not too surprising to see it advertised, dressed up , packaged, and marketed here on MetaFilter.

And for one of the crowd who gets so worked up by "editorials" here on Metafilter, it's hard to see how this front page post possibly qualified as a non-editorialized, "balanced" look at the LDS church. But as I've often maintained, that's what we're here for. Everyone is certainly entitled to their own views, regardless of the evils of product placement.

Shucks. Now nobody will get the chance to ask the thread moderator about the "fascinating history" of LDS polygamy and patriarchy, and ask if he is "proud" of the LDS church denying full participation to African Americans until 1978.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 3:42 PM on November 13, 2002


Gracefully handled, oissubke.

My second most recent post (I post once every three months just to keep in the habit it seems) was definitely an 'essayfilter' contribution (the bulk of which was hidden in the thread, but still...) and probably sub-optimal. It survived, though.

I haven't even looked at oissubke's thread yet, but I'm off to class in scant seconds, so I'll just add this : although I do hear loud and clear what Matt and others are saying, and agree, I'm still interested in information (when supplemented by a link or links that meet the guidelines) from people who have expertise and knowledge in areas I do not, and are willing to share it. That's one of the things that attracted me here in the first place. I don't know yet if oissubke's thread qualifies, but the principle is important to me.

Blurry line, I guess, as Matt says.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:50 PM on November 13, 2002


On one hand, the "this is what I'm interested in" posts probably belong at Kur5hin. :)

At the same time, I was amused by some of the links, like the Mormon movies and section on "Mormon vampires." I understand why some might have wanted it pulled, but it was an entertaining thread.

posted by deanc at 4:05 PM on November 13, 2002


I'm still interested in information (when supplemented by a link or links that meet the guidelines) from people who have expertise and knowledge in areas I do not, and are willing to share it.

Right, remember the election night posts from the guy working for the polling company? Or posts from Brits today in the "no drinking in the UK after 11pm" thread. Expertise is useful and contributes much to the conversation, so if a post related somehow to mormons comes up here, I'm sure oissubke and vis10n can chime in with their experiences, and that's fine.

Again, it's a blurry line. One could make an interesting, and somewhat impartial post about the "inner workings of the LDS" but today's had a bit too much earnest cheerleading in it to look remotely impartial.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 4:13 PM on November 13, 2002


that thread was a rare oportunity to observe y6y6y6 and Fold_and_Mutilate singing to (approx.) the same tune! Still, i think we are better of without it.
F_n_M, aren't there any Morums (mormon forum, ho ho) where you can stick to them on their own ground?
posted by asok at 4:17 PM on November 13, 2002


glad i did not put up my Jesse "King of Beaver Island" James Strang comment. (easy now) LDS has made great changes in the last 40 years. I thought the thread had a good cross section of info.

"Mormons peddle their religion door to door like Avon salespersons"

ya think howard hughes would trust Avon salespeople?
Perhaps he would toss them out of a casino plateglass window (poor frank).
posted by clavdivs at 4:26 PM on November 13, 2002


"LDS has made great changes in the last 40 years."

Can we pretty please with freakin sugar on top not continue deleted threads in the MetaTalk thread that's asking if they should be deleted? The inherent flaw in LSD theology brought up by your statement has left me quivering with the need to pounce on it and say more rude things about Mormons. Not a pretty sight.

The thread is over. It's dead. Stop baiting us. It's working.
posted by y6y6y6 at 4:38 PM on November 13, 2002


Isn't the real issue here that someone wanted to talk about the Mormon religion, and found links that would allow them to talk about it?

I don't have any problem with Oissubke or Mormons in general, I just think that it was an excuse to talk about a subject, instead of something found on the intarweb.
posted by Kafkaesque at 4:44 PM on November 13, 2002


The inherent flaw in LSD theology

i see what you mean.
posted by clavdivs at 4:48 PM on November 13, 2002


To place context about Strang (which was going to be me first post over a year ago) Strang, as i have said before, was a delusional renegade from the early church. he moved around and settled in Michigan. He proclaimed himself "king of America" or some such thing. He then abused his "flock" and was finally shot aboard a United States military vessel...in plain sight...and no one seemed to care. Strang also held some political positions which made him a threat to local politicians. perhaps this is the balanced context matt seeks. How american laws could be subverted by religious figures. (renegade as they may be) Any context to Koresh? Hell, it was a good post but not enough balance. This is (part) what MeTa is for, to discuss context even if it is about a deleted thread.

posted by clavdivs at 5:03 PM on November 13, 2002


and to talk about proper use of the comma
:)
posted by clavdivs at 5:05 PM on November 13, 2002


The inherent flaw in LSD theology is that you finally take enough LSD to see God, God tells you to stop taking LSD.
posted by timeistight at 5:06 PM on November 13, 2002


if you
posted by timeistight at 5:07 PM on November 13, 2002


Strang also held some political positions which made him a threat to local politicians.
on beaver island?
posted by quonsar at 5:33 PM on November 13, 2002


you tell me, you live closer.
posted by clavdivs at 5:52 PM on November 13, 2002


The inherent flaw in LSD theology is that you finally take enough LSD to see God, God tells you to stop taking LSD.

It's true. Happened to me.
posted by konolia at 7:28 PM on November 13, 2002


I just think that it was an excuse to talk about a subject

Well, it was informative and not really newsy, but mathowie's company analogy was appropriate.

The tone of the post was so professional that it's a shame to see it go, but oissubke will certainly post again, and we can look forward to that.
posted by hama7 at 7:44 PM on November 13, 2002


First - oissubke - I thought it was a great post, well put together, and it taught me some things I didn't know. I'm sorry that it got pulled but I, along with you, understand why Matt feels the way he does - thanks to his very clear and well-reasoned post. Matt, this is, I think, why so many of us trust you so much ... because you can say what you think in a well-reasoned way, which makes it clear you are a reasonable man.

I really think we ought to be discouraging this kind of "here's what I believe, am interested in, and want to show you

Why do you feel this way? Isn't every good post (and lots of bad ones) in a way reflective of what the poster is interested in? Wulfgar! are you really telling me that you're not interested in mentoring or low-budget scary movies?

To my mind, one of the things that separates MeFi from sites like Fark and /. is that in building a community we have come to know each other as people - we learn about one another's interests, home countries, husbands, wives, and lovers. We learn about favorite beers, favorite movies, favorite bands, favorite candies, and favorite political parties. Without that knowledge, this site is just a place to post links. With that knowledge, Metafilter is a community, where one has an actual conversation.

This has been happening for at least the last month lately. MeFi has gone from, "here's a cool link, and maybe some background info" to "here's today's lesson on ___. I used google and found a bunch of stuff."

12/15/01 Its been going on much longer than that, sonny boy. :-)

I'm sure there's some interesting stuff, but the Front Page seems too much like, "look how many links I found on a subject. Aren't i cool?"

For some reason I bet you wrote your secondary school compositions using only a single source, too. :-)

Look, as one of the poster girls for multi-link-essay-posts, let me say that its not about how many links I found or how cool I am ... its about being willing and able to take the time to do some research and pull together a really comprehensive look at a single topic - be it Bollywood, LDS, Haiku, or Pancakes.



posted by anastasiav at 9:14 PM on November 13, 2002


Lets not generalize, Ufez. There's no need to re-kindle that tired debate about number of links - its confuses the quantitative with the qualitative. If you can compose a thoughtful, interesting and well-researched post like a y2karl or an anastasiav then I say go for it. I agree that not everybody can do it well.

Know your topic. Phrase your presentation carefully. Also, ont underestimate the collective intelligence of Metafilter or you can expect to get dipped in corn salsa and then lightly grilled over a charcoal flame (mmmm, pollo asado)
posted by Winterfell at 10:09 PM on November 13, 2002


I just returned from a concert and am quite tired, so I'll just echo the second part of what Kaf so eloquently said.
posted by Ufez Jones at 10:17 PM on November 13, 2002


I'm still learning what makes a good post.

Have you thought about slowing down your frequency of posting, oissubke? I'd be surprised if anyone aside from Miguel matched your 13 front-page posts last month. Please don't take that the wrong way; FWIW, my record is 11 times in a month (my second here). Plus, I stupidly posted one of the dreaded "mystery links" just two weeks ago, so this imperfect poster isn't trying to belittle you or anything. But I do think the "post early and often!" phase hits a lot of us, and you seem well on your way to becoming one of the most frequent posters at MeFi this fall. If, as you say, you're still learning, perhaps slowing down to, say, one a week might be useful. Again, just a suggestion.


posted by mediareport at 12:02 AM on November 14, 2002


one a week might be useful

I don't think oissubke suffers for lack of quality of posts or links at all.

Slowing frequency of posting would be sage advice for posters who need practice or who haven't got a clue, but oissubke cannot be counted among either group.
posted by hama7 at 2:18 AM on November 14, 2002


one a week might be useful

but oissubke cannot be counted among either group

It's another group some have in mind... One in which you are going to be #4 very soon.
posted by y2karl at 3:08 AM on November 14, 2002 [1 favorite]


mediareport: Plus, I stupidly posted one of the dreaded "mystery links" just two weeks ago

This, to me, was an example of a fun and playful "mystery link" and I didn't mind it at all. Regarding that concern, and the subject of this thread, the problem we keep bumping our heads against is that it's not possible to clarify all those elusive factors that make a post a good (even when it seems to thwart prevailing preferences), or what makes can make a post bad (even when it doesn't seem to contradict the basic guidelines of what constitutes a "good post").

The FAQ, the Wiki, and [this is good] are going to help a lot in terms of isolating and identifying specific elements that contribute to good or bad posts, but at least two things will remain the same; one is that Matt will continue to resist rules (this is good), and the other is that only with thoughtful observation and participation will members learn to negotiate the sometimes dangerous shoals of Metafilter. There is no shame if a member who is invested in this way explores a new approach and it doesn't fly... win or lose, it helps to further refine our understanding of what constitutes the "anima" of mefi.
posted by taz at 6:05 AM on November 14, 2002


I promise that next time, I'll submit a single link, posted on Fark at least a few days previously, that links to a vaguely amusing flash animation

There's another option: do not post a new thread.
You have been very active here, 20 FPP's in less than 3 months right? Posting is by all means not mandatory. If you don't have anything interesting for the day, do not post anything.

posted by matteo at 6:41 AM on November 14, 2002


The general rule of thumb I've adopted is not to post anything to the front page anymore.
posted by transient at 8:20 AM on November 14, 2002


Me, too transient. No FPPs. Ever.
posted by ODiV at 10:01 AM on November 16, 2002


« Older I would like a MetaFilter thong please...   |   RSS feeds and bugs Newer »

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