Who is the most prolific poster? August 22, 2003 9:47 AM   Subscribe

Y'know how there's a 1 front page post per day limit? I started wondering, what's the longest run for anyone who was foolish enough (or perhaps inspired enough) to post every day? Are records kept of this stuff?
posted by jpburns to MetaFilter-Related at 9:47 AM (18 comments total)

Whatever it is, I bet on Migs.
posted by konolia at 10:08 AM on August 22, 2003

Might be, but they made John M. Poindexter quit and I don't know who to talk to now.
posted by mss at 10:45 AM on August 22, 2003

Lately, I would say it is crunchland--he seems to have a new post every day. He's of the one-linker, short sentence school, but still, he's an everyday peeps.
posted by y2karl at 10:52 AM on August 22, 2003

Miguel's longest streak: June 2 - June 7, 2003 (6 days.)
crunchland's longest streak: July 15 - July 25, 2003 (11 days.)

And you've got to be kidding me if you think I'm going to look up any more by hand. Paging jaden...
posted by Johnny Assay at 11:45 AM on August 22, 2003

oh, I'm positive migs has me beat if you go back far enough. Judging by recent posts, migs loses only because he doesn't love us anymore.

And you make it seem like it's a bad thing to be a prolific poster, XQWERTYUIOP.
posted by crunchland at 12:14 PM on August 22, 2003

Yeah, actually let's be quite clear on that - I don't think there's ANYTHING wrong with prolific front page posts, provided they all fit within the site guidelines (interesting, non-newsfiltery, non-double posts, etc). I realize this place would be hell if everyone posted every day, but I can't see using that as an argument NOT to post if you've run across something interesting.
posted by jonson at 12:38 PM on August 22, 2003

I don't know, crunch - I went back to Day One, and those were the results. True, Migs posts five or six days out of seven, but there are usually one- or two-day gaps which interrupt the streaks. Your glorious eleven-day streak, meanwhile, was something of an aberration (frequency-wise). Don't worry, Migs is still whuppin' your ass in total numbers (his 334 to your 124.)

That said, crunchland and Migs are only two out of the 25 most prolific posters. If anyone feels like checking SDB, owillis, y2karl, skallas, plep, etc. be my guest.
posted by Johnny Assay at 12:49 PM on August 22, 2003

hmm. Well, ok, but limiting the search to only the most prolific people is flawed, since it's conceivable that one user could have posted only a tenth the number of front page posts as me, each right after the other, to still out-do me.

As for my streak, I admit I posted with an agenda for awhile there. My goal was to show that it was possible to post quality content, of links most people probably hadn't seen on the other blogs they visited, culled from out-of-the-way places on the web -- places other than CNN, that were non-political, not at all controversial, and didn't require hours to digest (without a single meaningful alt-tag in the lot of them). Can't say if I was at all successful.
posted by crunchland at 1:58 PM on August 22, 2003

When Miguel stops posting, so does Carlos. What a weird coincidence!
posted by thirteen at 2:21 PM on August 22, 2003

I did nine days when I first joined until someone told me not to, from April 18, 2001 to April 26, 2001. Here is the resulting metatalk thread.
posted by feelinglistless at 2:21 PM on August 22, 2003

Can't say if I was at all successful.

You proved your point and the links were quality. But if we all
posted the same way, this place would be dreadfully boring.
posted by y2karl at 2:25 PM on August 22, 2003

As for my style, may I quote the owner of the site:

y2karl has been killing it recently, with one great post after another.

y6^3, y2karl is an outlier, pushing the limits of how much info goes into a post, and how much he can cram into a title tag.

I can't read Matt's mind and will not speak as if I have divined his intentions, but it seems to me that if he thought how I post was not in the spirit of the place, he would not have said what he said in the first quote above nor tweaked the tags and made the opt in default. He would have just told me to cool it. I certainly don't plan on always making 55 link posts or putting title tags on every link--it's too time consuming and my intention is to edutain, not annoy. I may get my back up when piled on but I do listen all the same. As for my frequency of late, it's been closer to once or twice a week.
posted by y2karl at 2:53 PM on August 22, 2003

well, we all get old. tried prunes?
posted by quonsar at 3:03 PM on August 22, 2003

You know what this means... that's right: POSTING MARATHON.

I'm going to see how many times in a row I can post, disregarding all complaints sans getting banned.

Anybody up for the challenge can join me. Let's go!
posted by Stan Chin at 10:36 PM on August 22, 2003

wow, is this ever a 'keeper' post from that meta thread you linked to, feelinglistless.

As for how boring things would be around here, karl, I submit that the kinds of links I post are more representative of the way metafilter used to be during the times everyone seems to pine for.
posted by crunchland at 7:20 AM on August 23, 2003

Yeah, where the hell is Miguel?
posted by insomnyuk at 9:08 AM on August 23, 2003

crunchland is right. I am sure that there are many people who have the concentration span to absorb y2karl's posts, which he obviously goes to a lot of trouble to research and compose, but there are others who prefer the short, concise style of crunchland et al. I prefer the latter myself, but that means nothing in the scheme of things. If all posts were the same style, it would get very boring here very quickly. The frequency that a user posts at is irrelevant, it is the quality that matters.
posted by dg at 4:10 PM on August 23, 2003

Style wars again? I like both types of post in balance. I think the problem I have with the longer-winded type of post (if there is one) is that it's more a research project than a "thing found on the web". Crunchland's style is more in line with the original spirit of this place, whereas y2karl, plep, etc, are on more of a memepool vibe. This is not necessarily a bad thing per se, but this is a filter, not an arts review and some kind of balance should be maintained in that direction.

Not to belittle anyone's effort: I often read posts and follow links from each of the people I have mentioned in this comment, without preference, so it would be hypocritical for me to say that there was no place here for any of it. Also I'll be the first to admit that I am crap at making posts to mefi, and so probably have no idea what I'm talking about.

However, it does strike me that the ideal process of posting to metafilter is to find something accidentally, ensure that it hasn't been linked before, and then post a link to it with some description. One or more appropriate ancillary links may also be helpful, but should never be added for the sake of it. This is only a matter of opinion, but I think it "breaks the Tao" of metafilter if one specifically looks for something to post. But since the Tao of metafilter is now recognisably a many-splintered thing, this is mere academic verbiage and can safely be ignored. Plus I'm not intending to "have a go", merely elucidate an observation. Thanks for all the links, whatever.
posted by walrus at 4:23 AM on August 26, 2003

« Older Secret URL for work filters   |   You have a problem with authority, Mr. Anderson Newer »

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