Bad one-link news-style post November 22, 2002 9:47 PM   Subscribe

A good example of a bad one-link, news-style post. [more]
posted by The God Complex to Etiquette/Policy at 9:47 PM (12 comments total)

It's a boring review of a car used as a stepping stone to make some political statement about the War on Iraq. Setting aside the fact that it's been done a thousand times before on MetaFilter if it's been done once*, this could have been five, ten, twenty times better if the poster in question had linked to some articles, resources, etc. that showed some information about what he or she is saying. MetaFilter, at least on the front page, shouldn't be a soap box to rail against something without at least (at least!) doing a little work to make it interesting.

I hesitated bring this up because I know it's been talked about ad nauseam, but it seems that XQUZYPHYR has done this before--including two links to Bill O'Reilly-related content in the past month and (regardless of the justifcations given, it smacks of political agenda).

I'd be very happy if Matt just axed all these threads when they appeared, but I bet he'd be inundated with more angry e-mails than he is now.

*Not that we should set it aside necessarily
posted by The God Complex at 9:48 PM on November 22, 2002


Yeah, pretty boring, banal, and typical of the last dozen posts about SUVs.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:56 PM on November 22, 2002


The thread was typical, but I thought the linked review was hilarious.

Anyhoo, I'm not sure what XQUZYPHYR's posts about Bill O'Reilly have to do with whether this FPP was appropriate. I would hate to see interesting posts deleted because they're consistent with a user's "agenda."
posted by subgenius at 11:14 PM on November 22, 2002


Anyhoo, I'm not sure what XQUZYPHYR's posts about Bill O'Reilly have to do with whether this FPP was appropriate. I would hate to see interesting posts deleted because they're consistent with a user's "agenda."

Sorry, upon re-reading it I realize I wasn't necessarily clear. What I meant was editorializing on the front page and using a link that had absolutely nothing to do with what he was talking about.

It was like "Hey, here's a link about SUVs. SUVs are bad and here's some stuff I think about the war on Iraq."

I pointed it out because I think he's done it at least a few times before and the point of this place is to point out, discuss the merits of such actions, no?
posted by The God Complex at 11:48 PM on November 22, 2002


Yes, it is indeed. And you're completely wrong. The lines about the war in Iraq were offhanded (and obviously failed attempt at humor on my part) remarks relating to the true point of my post, which was that it's beyond absurd that a somewhat mainstream automotive review site would call "practical" a quasi-military-issue vehicle that gets 10 miles to the gallon.

Despite my disapproval of the Iraq war and my general left-wing leanings, the post, really, honestly, was just about how stupid this car is. Obviously it bored Matt, which I consider a more relevant arbiter (however disagreeable and rude I find his above comment.) So, apparently it was killed on the grounds that it was lacking in support for it's anti-war argument. Considering I wasn't trying to give it one, I fail to find the need to beg for the court's mercy here.

As far as your rationale about two posts on Bill O'Reilly meaning some agenda goes, subgenius already nailed it: they have nothing to do with this, and if you honestly think it's part of some secret liberal plot of mine, well then, you're on crack. You might have noticed in the humor site thread that I already covered the fact that it wasn't specifically about O'Reilly, and in the later thread the very first thing I did in the comments section was note how this bias I wanted to talk about is being done equally on the left. If you're accusing me of direct intended partisanship it's because you're going out of your way to look for it.

If you disagree with my political leanings, God Complex, you're welcome to attack them when I make a blatantly trollish partisan FPP. I haven't done that yet, so leave me alone. The reason this whole deal pisses me off is that despite my political leanings I have been called on two threads in which I was actually trying to avoid being partisan and address an even debate on. I find it mildly ironic that your apparent distaste for my political views made you choose this thread, which wasn't really about them, to jump up my ass about it.

I've made posts with news items about something (in my mind) stupid the current administration has done. I have my own website in which I write blatantly left-leaning commentary. I don't need to create excuses to instill my political beliefs, nor do I need to attempt to insult the intellegence of most MeFi users here by trying to slip in some deliberate political message when I think I can do just fine making a direct one. If I want to talk about my opposition to the war in Iraq, I'll do it, and I don't need to be insulted myself with the implication that I couldn't make a compelling case, as you claimed I'm not able to.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 1:17 AM on November 23, 2002


Pretty subpar post, I guess, on what has traditionally been one of 'those topics' here, but I've got to side with XQUZYPHYR here (in part perhaps because of the similarity in our political leanings) and think that the fact that this particular beast of a vehicle is modelled on a military truck, and is seeing market at this warlike and oil-oriented point in history... that is interesting, I think, and worthy of better discussion than the thread saw before Matt nuked it.

Ah well.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 1:29 AM on November 23, 2002


find it mildly ironic that your apparent distaste for my political views made you choose this thread, which wasn't really about them, to jump up my ass about it.

Funny, I don't recall saying I disagreed with your politics. If you see that somewhere (anywhere), feel free to point it out to me.

(Interesting how I became right wing as soon as I disagreed with you though.)

Just because I agree with you doesn't mean I think you should be editorializing on the front page of this site. Anybody could find a link about a topic that relates to a personal opinion of their's in some half-assed way and then rail on about that opinon for a paragraph or two. What the hell does that serve as far as filtering the net goes?

Despite my disapproval of the Iraq war and my general left-wing leanings, the post, really, honestly, was just about how stupid this car is.

Ok, then. I'd suggest making that the front page post to avoid confusion, instead of making half of it a "joke" about Iraq.
posted by The God Complex at 2:05 AM on November 23, 2002


and think that the fact that this particular beast of a vehicle is modelled on a military truck, and is seeing market at this warlike and oil-oriented point in history... that is interesting, I think, and worthy of better discussion than the thread saw before Matt nuked it.

In which case a link or two about that could have been provided, don't you think?
posted by The God Complex at 2:08 AM on November 23, 2002


Of course. I said the post was subpar, didn't I?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:17 AM on November 23, 2002


...you're welcome to attack them when I make a blatantly trollish partisan FPP

See here's the funny thing; No one ever think they do this. Ever. And still, it is so easy to see others do it.

Completely unworkable but wouldn't it be funny if there was a Partisanship Check button right next to the Spell Check?

I have found 3 examples of egregious chauvinism in your post. Would you like me to correct them for you?
posted by Dagobert at 5:37 AM on November 23, 2002


I'd like to know how you'd program that little bit of amorphous goo.
posted by crunchland at 6:27 AM on November 23, 2002


Just because I agree with you doesn't mean I think you should be editorializing on the front page of this site. Anybody could find a link about a topic that relates to a personal opinion of their's in some half-assed way and then rail on about that opinon for a paragraph or two. What the hell does that serve as far as filtering the net goes?

One sentence.

Ok, then. I'd suggest making that the front page post to avoid confusion, instead of making half of it a "joke" about Iraq.

I said ONE sentence in the FPP that mentioned Iraq. Not half the FPP. Part of one sentence. Stop it.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 7:20 AM on November 23, 2002


« Older What's with the naming conventions around here ?   |   Is Google indexing broken? Newer »

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