the dreaded double March 7, 2003 8:33 AM   Subscribe

Linking to a site that has been posted before: the dreaded double.

Case in point - I wanted to do a "Friday flash" just to offer a little B-Ball game that is cool for game people and with ban added bonus that it is great for download. Just something to balance the rather "heavy" load of war talk going on in all forms of the media.

MiniClip Download Page

Where is the line drawn for posting a link to a site that has been posted before, yet the content has changed?

for what it is worth, the "shooting hoops" was what I wanted to post, but held off.

Happy Friday!
posted by lampshade to Etiquette/Policy at 8:33 AM (11 comments total)

why the unusual line breaks?
posted by matteo at 9:22 AM on March 7, 2003

probably because of my wrist which is broken. I try to keep the spelling correct, but do not pay attention to line breaks. I also compose alot in notepad as of late. sometimes it yields weird line breaks.
posted by lampshade at 9:42 AM on March 7, 2003

Nothin' better than some old-fashioned 5-on-1 basketball, just like we used to play in prison.
posted by Hildago at 11:08 AM on March 7, 2003

Where is the line drawn for posting a link to a site that has been posted before, yet the content has changed?

As long as the content is new, who cares? Cf. The Washington Post and The New York Times. Post away.
posted by vraxoin at 11:13 AM on March 7, 2003

This is just a weird aside, but does anyone find the concept of this post weird?

I mean, no offense, lampshade, but didn't you basically just post a link under the pretense of asking if it's okay to post it? "Here, smell this milk and tell me if you think it's bad," you know?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 11:46 AM on March 7, 2003


I don't think he did...mostly cause he didn't post it on the blue, and without given us the url, we wouldn't have known to what he was referring. (just my opinion)

As to the question at hand...when is double linking ok, I think if the content has changed, it's cool...although to head off the "double post" police, you might want to include a note on the first post inside the thread that says "I know it's a double, but the content has changed", or whatever the reason is.

Whereas we probably never need to see the cat scan site again, or god forbid the return of the vibrating broomsticks...the site has been around for 3 years and many of the people/users have not. Ergo, sometimes a reminder of a funny site from times gone by may not be out of line. (Again, purely my opinion.)
posted by dejah420 at 11:53 AM on March 7, 2003

I agree dejah420 (mainly because I can't fathom the forces that drive the "double post police").

Sites put up new content. Lets see them linked to.
Sites suddenly become relevant. Let's see them linked to.
Well-known sites put up content. Hell, let's see them linked to as well - after all, this is MetaFilter - the filter for the filters.

After all, who does a double post really harm? Is it just a prestige thing? People jumping up and down to prove that, "hey, I remember that site being linked to 18 months ago, aren't I a good little MeFi scout?!"
posted by Jimbob at 11:20 PM on March 7, 2003

"hey, I remember that site being linked to 18 months ago, aren't I a good little MeFi scout?!"

In many cases, yep. In cases where it's really a grievous double-post, as in the times when someone has reposted something an hour after it was originally posted (they just couldn't be bothered to read the front page or search for the link) it's good to call the poster out and publically shame them. A good shaming is healthy from time to time, I says.
posted by Hildago at 12:17 AM on March 8, 2003

Also - in cases where the post is still active in the other thread, a DP call out prevents valuable comments from being fragmented across multiple threads. Finally, as all of the entries (posts, comments, etc) are database entries, and each call to the DB incrementally slows down the site, calling out a DP to prevent people from lazily posting without using the search function helps the site as a whole.
posted by jonson at 3:45 PM on March 8, 2003

well, I managed a treble post a while back. And it seemed to be taken well. It all depends on the context I think.

Anyone any idea what's the highest number of times a link has been posted before people start screaming at the poster?
posted by twine42 at 8:44 AM on March 10, 2003

It used to be that when a double was posted it was pointed out, the poster apologized, and Matt deleted it. That seemed a good system, but now a double is posted, it's pointed out, and people go merrily on discussing it. If the rules have changed, I'd like to know about it. I've given up on great stuff I wanted to post because I discovered it had already been discussed here.
posted by languagehat at 1:39 PM on March 10, 2003

« Older invisible image with a MeFi-specific URL   |   mefi lazyweb Newer »

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