Rediff.com mentions the "ever-popular" MetaFilter in an not uninteresting article.

June 15, 2003 5:57 PM

Rohini Kapur of Rediff.com mentions the "ever-popular" MetaFilter in an not uninteresting article.
posted by MiguelCardoso to MetaFilter-Related at 5:57 PM (21 comments total)

Somewhat off topic, but why is the linking culture in online journalism so horrible? I can't count the number of articles I've read where a story is referencing some specific thing on the internet and doesn't include links at all.

When they are included they are often like this article, only to the top-level url. "Metafilter discussed this class." There's a link to metafilter, we'll go ahead and let you find the relevant pages, as we're too busy to be bothered. Its weird.
posted by rhyax at 7:47 PM on June 15, 2003

Interesting, since MetaFilter just mentioned rediff.com.
posted by wendell at 7:56 PM on June 15, 2003

Somewhat off topic, but why is the linking culture in online journalism so horrible?

Well, because you can't hyperlink in print, and most online journalism is an electronic version of a print journal. Some of the editing systems still used by major papers and newsweeklies are relics of the '70s.
posted by kindall at 12:47 AM on June 16, 2003

Migs:

1. "in an not uninteresting article." wtf You edit for carlos and you post this bit of grammar mangling?

2. "Well, I've had enough. Whatever enjoyment I got out of MetaFilter in the past has by now been overshadowed by this constant abuse which shows no sign of abating."

Chat/Discussion filter Migs, So why are you still here?
posted by DBAPaul at 3:23 AM on June 16, 2003

DBAP - go back again; read again, more carefully. As far as the error goes, this is absolutely typical of a rewrite error:

[first draft] In an interesting article...

changed to...

[second draft] In a not uninteresting article

except the "an" didn't get changed to "a". I do this sort of thing all the time. I'm too busy looking at the words I changed, and not the words I didn't change.
posted by taz at 3:47 AM on June 16, 2003

Editing error or not, double negatives do not contain no grammar problems.
</pointless grammatical nitpicking>
posted by blue mustard at 4:06 AM on June 16, 2003

where's the double negative?
posted by taz at 4:48 AM on June 16, 2003

okay, yes, but: "Readers will also assign an affirmative meaning to constructions that yoke not with an adjective or adverb that begins with a negative prefix such as in- or un-, as in a not infrequent visitor or a not unjust decision. In these expressions the double negative conveys a weaker affirmative than would be conveyed by the positive adjective or adverb by itself."

This is used purposely; it conveys a shade of meaning.
posted by taz at 4:57 AM on June 16, 2003

Chat/Discussion filter Migs, So why are you still here?

Go back and read the rest of the passage you were quoting, as you just flunked reading comprehension.
posted by konolia at 5:04 AM on June 16, 2003

Taz: as usual, you're spot on.

I started by writing "an interesting article". Then I reflected and saw this was hogwash. The article is, in fact, a little boring and predictable. So I lazily added a "not", forgetting to change the definite article to "a".

Reflecting even more, I'd just add the un- suffix, as in "an uninteresting article." Or I could have said "an arguably not uninteresting article."

*grammar bores rule!*
posted by MiguelCardoso at 6:11 AM on June 16, 2003

DBA Paul: you get awarded the coveted You Wish badge.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 6:13 AM on June 16, 2003

I think "not interesting" might have been more appropriate, but good to see you're still here Miguel.
posted by johnny novak at 6:17 AM on June 16, 2003

It's a kind of litotes, my favorite rhetorical figure, except on days when I prefer zeugma.
posted by redfoxtail at 8:00 AM on June 16, 2003

Redfoxtail gets a gold star.

(Saving others the drudgery of a [not unfascinating!] google search: litotes and zeugma. On a side note, it turns out that zeugma is closely related to my all-time favorite word.)
posted by gleuschk at 8:41 AM on June 16, 2003

If this were a giant high-school locker room, and not a website, Miguel would have the world's most wet-towel-scarred ass.
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 9:40 AM on June 16, 2003

So I lazily added a "not", forgetting to change the definite article to "a".

HA! "A" is an indefinite article! More pointless pedantry!
posted by norm at 10:59 AM on June 16, 2003

I started by writing "an interesting article". Then I reflected and saw this was hogwash. The article is, in fact, a little boring and predictable.

I'm confused. If you felt the article (this one, not the "a") was boring, why did you create a post about it?
posted by gluechunk at 1:17 PM on June 16, 2003

MetaFilter: a giant high-school locker room.

please don't laugh at my underwear.
posted by danOstuporStar at 1:32 PM on June 16, 2003

I like Hulk Underoos. I appreciate wearing underpants with a lot of green on them in order to cover... de-emphasize... uh, nevermind. Forget it. Ignore me. Move along, nothing to see in my underwear... I mean... oh, poop. No, I don't mean... NO! DON'T HIT POST!
posted by wendell at 2:16 PM on June 16, 2003

Chat/Discussion filter Migs, So why are you still here?

Man, I even spelled it out and everything...
posted by cohappy at 2:33 PM on June 16, 2003

err, here...
posted by cohappy at 2:35 PM on June 16, 2003