Pointless post.

November 30, 2002 7:22 PM

This post does not seem to have any point, nor do the comments.
posted by owillis to Etiquette/Policy at 7:22 PM (32 comments total)

Owillis, if that is the criteria for front page posts, don't you agree there would be far fewer of them? *wink*
posted by konolia at 7:29 PM on November 30, 2002

Agreed. Pointless as a bag of wet mice.
posted by hama7 at 7:32 PM on November 30, 2002

Yawn. Steve_at_Linnwood even posts like that deserve a minute of freedom.
posted by RobertLoch at 8:01 PM on November 30, 2002

hama7 & owillis, aren't you both staunch conservatives? How odd that you would both end up here, decrying the legitimacy of a post with a liberal slant...
posted by jonson at 8:56 PM on November 30, 2002

Here we go again. I liked the link, and I had no idea Granny D existed. Maybe the link could have been introduced in a better, but it was still something I hadn't seen before. Matt should decide once, and for all yes, or no on political posts because all this sniping back, and forth over what posts are good, and bad is a waste of time. Oh, if you like politics you should try Plastic.com, they have a whole section dedicated to politics, and the conversations are usually quite civil.
posted by jbou at 9:01 PM on November 30, 2002

I liked my comment.
posted by eddydamascene at 9:21 PM on November 30, 2002

hama7 & owillis, aren't you both staunch conservatives?

Ha! You really don't know owillis very well, do you?
posted by gd779 at 9:53 PM on November 30, 2002

Hey, I think a bag of wet mice would be cool!

gd779: yep. Only on MeFi would owillis be considered conservative.
posted by Slithy_Tove at 10:21 PM on November 30, 2002

hama7 & owillis, aren't you both staunch conservatives?

Since we're tossing around labels, I'll fess up as a dyed-in-the-wool (baa!) liberal that I think the post was lousy, and, while I'm at it, it would be nice if people would lighten up on hama7 and steve_at_linwood already.

It wasn't the link that was necessarily the problem, the same topic could have been done better, something like:

---

Granny D is a 92 year old campaign finance reform activist who marched across the US prior to the 2000 election. Granny is not just a gimmick, though, she's made some eloquent and provocative speeches.

---

Not perfect, I know, some folks would object to the multilink style, or the lack of the word "spitfire" which I'm sure belongs in there somewhere, but I believe my version manages to post on the same topic without sounding like an excuse for a rant.

It doesn't have to be "sniping back and forth", metatalk is the place to discuss this stuff, and I'd like think a lot of this could be solved if people thought a bit about posting style in addition to topic.
posted by malphigian at 10:29 PM on November 30, 2002

Only on MeFi would owillis be considered conservative.

Oh, and the Republican party--before Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, too.
posted by y2karl at 10:36 PM on November 30, 2002

A post about the granny's walk was posted a year ago or so, and yeah, that post didn't really have a point.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:52 PM on November 30, 2002

Owillis, my apologies; a brief review of some of your posts caused me to think you were a politically cut from the same cloth as ossibuke, S_@_L, hama7, etc. Next time I'll have to read more carefully!
posted by jonson at 11:53 PM on November 30, 2002

I can't tell, as it is AIDS day here now. But was that Granny D thread killed? I made some really heartfelt comments in there.

And the post "didn't really have a point"?

Granted, the link was one I'd already read more than a month ago. I'd have never dreamt of posting it here. But I was personally intrigued by the discussion. In some cases a lot can be gleaned from the peanut gallery. And if that was who was posting to the link, so be it, I enjoyed it. In fact, I couldn't wait to get home to see what else there was to be read.

Oh well.

I do however pretty much think it's bullshit though, if it's true the thread was nixed..
posted by crasspastor at 12:48 AM on December 1, 2002

crasspastor, you can still see the comments here, but I deleted it because the link wasn't all that interesting (uninteresting op-ed pieces make shitty posts, as I've said time and time again) and the polarized, predictable banter that followed as half of the people talked past the other half wasn't all that enlightening.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 1:01 AM on December 1, 2002

Wow. That really took off while I was gone. . .
posted by crasspastor at 1:25 AM on December 1, 2002

In a bad way.
posted by crasspastor at 1:29 AM on December 1, 2002

So if a post generates a lot of controversy, with wildly differing opinions and a political slant one way or another it gets deleted? Is that how this works? I had no idea until now.
posted by Eyegore at 8:53 AM on December 1, 2002

Eve- its not that, I think that its every political post is like that, plus, though they may have different links, their comments all end up sounding alike. Read Matt's posts on the Granny post, and that how just about every politcal post ends up here.
posted by jmd82 at 9:21 AM on December 1, 2002

Eyegore: You might want to search past metatalk threads on this.

In general, political posts polarize into the typical camps shouting at each other and not really listening ("talking past each other" as matt said above), with perhaps a few gems buried inside.

Its something metafilter is BAD at, since noise quickly overtakes signal. I believe to have worthwhile political debate in an open forum you really need a moderation system like kuro5hin and/or a restricted membership size.

There are plenty of places on the web to engage in political debate, I'm still hoping metafilter is about something else: interesting, odd, informative, surprising links, with discussion following that, not vice versa.
posted by malphigian at 9:50 AM on December 1, 2002

a brief review of some of your posts caused me to think you were a politically cut from the same cloth as ossibuke, S_@_L, hama7, etc

I truly appreciate the fact that people here are able to identify the few "conservative" voices. It allows us to recognize the blatant labelling and categorizing that MeFi members enjoy.
posted by BlueTrain at 11:31 AM on December 1, 2002

Oh, great, now I'm a conservative!
Can I start kicking the old ladies?
posted by owillis at 11:39 AM on December 1, 2002

Go back to Massachusetts, pinko!
posted by Samsonov14 at 2:12 PM on December 1, 2002

I truly appreciate the fact that people here are able to identify the few "conservative" voices. It allows us to recognize the blatant labelling and categorizing that MeFi members enjoy.

What, exactly, is it that you are objecting to? Every one of those people has self-identified here as a conservative. Are we supposed to pretend that we don't know, like it's some dirty secret?
posted by rushmc at 9:51 PM on December 1, 2002

Can I start kicking the old ladies?

Remind me to show you the Geriatric Slide-Tackle™
posted by hama7 at 2:06 AM on December 2, 2002

Every one of those people has self-identified here as a conservative. Are we supposed to pretend that we don't know, like it's some dirty secret?

Exactly. If anything, we conservatives are over-eager to label ourselves. Besides, it should be obvious that not only are we not ashamed of it, but, in fact, more than a little proud of instilling some common sense into...*add long conservative rant*

Anyway, our real beef isn't with lefties, it's with the bloody libertarian rationalists like rushmc. ;)
posted by MiguelCardoso at 3:07 AM on December 2, 2002

It allows us to recognize the blatant labelling and categorizing that MeFi members enjoy.

Speaking personally, I try quite hard not to label or categorise people. Should I hand in my membership now?
posted by walrus at 7:37 AM on December 2, 2002

Damn you libertarians!
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 9:02 AM on December 2, 2002

Am I the only one who finds it a little ironic that the FPP was deleted, but thanks to malphigian it is still completely preserved in MetaTalk (where people, incidentally, continue to talk about it)? Don't you see- nothing changed, people? It's madness I tell you.

And don't think I won't remember this convenient loophole.
posted by dgaicun at 9:29 AM on December 2, 2002

So if a post generates a lot of controversy, with wildly differing opinions and a political slant one way or another it gets deleted? Is that how this works?

I'd enjoy MetaFilter much more if it worked like that.
posted by timeistight at 9:38 AM on December 2, 2002

Anyway, our real beef isn't with lefties, it's with the bloody libertarian rationalists like rushmc. ;)

Heh. I'm glad to see I have been graduated from "leftie" around here, at least in your mind, Miguel (if I were the hugging type, I might hug you)!

As you know, I loathe labels of any sort, but if one insists upon adhering one to me, I prefer "Optimalist" to all others, as I believe that anything, however good, can--and therefore should--be improved.
posted by rushmc at 9:41 AM on December 2, 2002

but I deleted it because the link wasn't all that interesting (uninteresting op-ed pieces make shitty posts, as I've said time and time again) and the polarized, predictable banter that followed as half of the people talked past the other half wasn't all that enlightening. -- mathowie

Ah, it's all about enlightenment - I didn't realize that. Well, let the enlightenment begin.
posted by RylandDotNet at 1:00 PM on December 2, 2002

Yay! Another victory for the Metafilter PC shock troops.

Metafilter's new theme - "If A Few Consider It Objectionable, It Must Be Quashed".

Thank God. It clears the way for more Joe Batchelor threads.
posted by mark13 at 1:38 PM on December 2, 2002