Self-linker on Metafilter September 16, 2003 3:43 PM   Subscribe

The guidelines say: Self-linking also appropriates the use of MetaFilter as your guestbook...

So why is this still here?
posted by dg to Etiquette/Policy at 3:43 PM (75 comments total)

matt hasn't seen it yet.
posted by quonsar at 3:48 PM on September 16, 2003


but when matt sees it...
posted by quonsar at 3:49 PM on September 16, 2003


he'll prolly leave it alone like the other johnnydark (or IS it jcterminal?) posts.
posted by quonsar at 3:50 PM on September 16, 2003


In that case, I'd like to plug my website at www-----

NO CARRIER
posted by keswick at 4:01 PM on September 16, 2003


Apparently, this is the last time Matt contributed to his own site, about 26 hours ago (unless there's a deletion I missed). Another 22 hours, and we officially call the cast from "Without a Trace".
posted by wendell at 4:05 PM on September 16, 2003


oh, the humanities.
posted by crunchland at 4:09 PM on September 16, 2003


GODDAMIT MATT WHY AREN'T YOU SATISFYING US FAST ENOUGH?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 4:13 PM on September 16, 2003


could someone please direct me to the burning dirigible?
posted by quonsar at 4:24 PM on September 16, 2003


/me points quonsar towards Robert Plant with his hair on fire.
posted by scody at 4:54 PM on September 16, 2003


I realise that mathowie is not hovering over MeFi, slavishly checking each new thread for self-links etc, but this is a self-link of the worst kind, being a direct link to a user's own site, with political content of the kind that usually ends up in a trainwreck on MeFi. I feel that the user concerned has thoroughly earned being dragged into MeTa and given a severe thrashing for his sins. He should know better and this is simply an attention-grab.
posted by dg at 5:00 PM on September 16, 2003


it's not like anyone could show an iota of self-restraint and resist posting the kind of stuff that turns threads like that into a trainwreck.
posted by crunchland at 5:05 PM on September 16, 2003


restraint

crunchland said the "r" word...
posted by quonsar at 5:07 PM on September 16, 2003


but he posted in said thread....
posted by Espoo2 at 5:07 PM on September 16, 2003


oh wait, nevermind...someone was quoting via copy/paste
posted by Espoo2 at 5:08 PM on September 16, 2003


resist posting the kind of stuff that turns threads like that into a trainwreck
You first.
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 5:08 PM on September 16, 2003


not threads like this. Threads like that.
posted by crunchland at 5:09 PM on September 16, 2003


Smells like a MeTa troll to me. Obvious self-link, insane and offensive user page, apparent connection to other user accounts, etc.

"I wonder how long it will take them to start a whole MeTa thread going nuts about this and this crazy user account . . ."
posted by Mid at 5:24 PM on September 16, 2003


I e-mailed Matt a while back about that user page but got no reply. I'm suprised it took this long for someone else to make a public comment about it.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 5:36 PM on September 16, 2003


what Mid said: either johnnyboy is having a funny 'haha' or he is one seriously {seriously} disturbed individual.
posted by poopy at 5:59 PM on September 16, 2003


The thread is deleted and johnnydark has been turned into a footstool. All's well that ends well.
posted by languagehat at 6:02 PM on September 16, 2003


This post was deleted for the following reason: self-link

Mid raises an interesting point. While the thread has been deleted, the user has still managed to gain a lot of traffic and a lot of attention to his site. While I assume that the charming little story on johnydark's user page is fiction, it concerns me that MeFi is now linking to the contents of the FPP, which is questionable to say the least:
"She was young, no more than 16 ..."
Yes, I am aware of the irony of giving him more attention by my link.
posted by dg at 6:03 PM on September 16, 2003


it concerns me that MeFi is now linking to the contents of the FPP

Steady on, dg - it's pretty clearly fiction to me anyway (and that part wasn't part of the FPP, but from other parts of johnnydark's blog). Perhaps not to my tastes, but the man's allowed to write what he likes on his own blog, as far as I know he didn't link to that part.

I'm mildly sorry to see it go, if only because languagehat's link made me laugh, and "His unibrow rumbled on his forehead" has now been added to my personal phraseology.
posted by biscotti at 6:13 PM on September 16, 2003


This MeTa thread just ensures even more hits for this creepy weirdo's stupid, plagiarizing blog.

The system is broken.
posted by Space Coyote at 6:37 PM on September 16, 2003


i agree with XQUZYPHYR that johnny's userpage is disturbing by itself - fiction or not - and his blog even moreso. i've never considered questioning the membership of anyone on mefi before but this is something altogether different IMO.
posted by poopy at 6:48 PM on September 16, 2003


This MeTa thread just ensures even more hits for this creepy weirdo's stupid, plagiarizing blog.

The system is broken.


Today's tempest is, however, tomorrow's teapot. The system has never been particularly good at stopping the contamination of our otherwise...ahem...serene and wise discourse with the profligate verbal fartings of the kind exampled in the user page and blog mentioned. But it seems pretty good at recovering from them.

And while it might be frustrating that talking about/linking to objectionable material winds up driving traffic to the crap under discussion, that seems to me just an inevitable -- if regrettable -- byproduct of how we're currently able to find things. Which I don't think one should lose much sleep over.

Not that we shouldn't all enjoy a nice communal groan.
posted by BT at 7:28 PM on September 16, 2003


i've never considered questioning the membership of anyone on mefi before but this is something altogether different IMO.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
*falls off chair, rolls on floor laughing, spews liquid geritol 60 feet through two open windows onto neighbors monitor*
posted by quonsar at 7:51 PM on September 16, 2003


spews liquid geritol 60 feet through two open windows onto neighbors monitor

Maybe stan can design an icon for this.

I say this meta thread should be deleted to so this guy gets no additional publicity offa Mefi.
posted by dgaicun at 8:03 PM on September 16, 2003


too
posted by dgaicun at 8:04 PM on September 16, 2003


He posts such great things though!

What MetaFilter needs is more great users like son_of_minya, johnnydark, settle, etc. They challenge perceptions and keep the site exciting! But do we appreciate them? Nooooo, we badmouth them and we try to get them banned. Shame on us.

Personally I miss the days of multi-thread and multiple user-name spamming by the likes of Mickey Suttle! Or something.
posted by bargle at 8:05 PM on September 16, 2003


* angrymodem is shifting to fifth gear with peter tork
posted by angry modem at 8:20 PM on September 16, 2003


and that's not a proper noun, either. *
posted by quonsar at 8:33 PM on September 16, 2003


Did anyone ever get to the bottom of this? Maybe it's some often-reprinted story on the web? An in-joke? An urban legend? Any comments from jcterminal? Strange.
posted by dhoyt at 8:36 PM on September 16, 2003


it's from here i guess: 25 to life
posted by amberglow at 8:54 PM on September 16, 2003


or stileproject originally i think
posted by amberglow at 8:56 PM on September 16, 2003


or both? one leads to the other
posted by amberglow at 8:57 PM on September 16, 2003

it concerns me that MeFi is now linking to the contents of the FPP
You must be FUCKING kidding me!
posted by mischief at 10:03 PM on September 16, 2003


>16 links and 44 comments to MetaFilter
>and no threads and no comments to MetaTalk

...calculate and graph a ratio of each individual user's L and C totals? This would, in my opinion, help...

posted by Wilma Slaghoople to pony requests at 1:46 AM PST
posted by philfromhavelock at 10:44 PM on September 16, 2003


If it weren't for their politics, taking their deleterious effect on MeFi as a guide, I'd seriously question whether johnnydark and David Dark are the same person - or at least, brothers. Either way, both of them are ridiculous clowns who don't even merit the attention of a whole MeTa thread. But that's the Catch-22 of denouncing attention-hungry idiots.
posted by soyjoy at 10:57 PM on September 16, 2003


I suggest Matt purge the entire database, to clean us up from the dreaded taint of it all.
posted by crunchland at 11:31 PM on September 16, 2003


I don't usually like to jump on a bandwagon, but sweet holy fuck: 'A Guide To Rape Drugs for Potential Rapists'? Wow.
posted by hot soup girl at 11:58 PM on September 16, 2003


But that's the Catch-22 of denouncing attention-hungry idiots

That's f*cking rich considering the likes of your Miguels, crunchlands, quonsars, y6, etc.

(I'd put me in there if only they would stop giving me so much work to do at work)
posted by Frasermoo at 5:56 AM on September 17, 2003


I say this meta thread should be deleted to so this guy gets no additional publicity offa Mefi.

I couldn't agree more.
posted by Tarrama at 6:48 AM on September 17, 2003


Frist: this was a shitty post.

That said: I always thought self-link meant a link to one's own work, not just a link to content hosted under an account one happens to own.

The poster didn't pretend to have written this. So what is the prescribed way for linking to a chunk of text that is making the rounds in email, for example? Is it really a sin to post it somewhere, making it http-accessible, and then link to it?

Or do we really have to wait around for someone else to do exactly the same thing before we can FPP? I'm genuinely in the dark on this ettiquette point. Someone guide me.
posted by scarabic at 11:01 AM on September 17, 2003


"Someone guide me."

I would lobby you that if something cool is making the rounds via email, it will get posted and discussed on 200-300 web logs in short order. If it's not interesting enough to make it from email to the web at large, I'm not sure it's interesting enough to post here.

Just my opinion:

We keep hearing about these things - Something that is sooooo wonderful, but it doesn't exist on the web, so there *needs* to be a self link. I don't buy it.
posted by y6y6y6 at 11:16 AM on September 17, 2003


Also, scarabic, linking to your own blog is a traffic generator whether the content is yours or not. So if I wanted to get a lot of hits on my blog, I could post there whatever story I think people will click to see, and make it the main link of an FPP. Does that sound fair to you?
posted by soyjoy at 12:16 PM on September 17, 2003


<Sigh>

Yes, I am attention-hungry, but Metafilter is filled with attention-hungry people, so I feel right at home. And we're all idiots, so that doesn't insult me too much either, especially considering who posted the suggestion.

What I actually aspire to be, most of all, is a trouble-maker, which these days isn't actually all that easy. The World Trade Center jumpers all had our attention for the 20-odd seconds it took them to fall, but no one knows their names except their families. When I jump, I want to make a point.

And my point today is this:

Most of you only support free speech when the speech in question doesn't make you uncomfortable or annoyed. You love to censor speech that you think is somehow dangerous, or hateful, or even rude. That's lame.

What I do is try to expose ideas, good and bad. I use hyperbole, sarcasm and humour to get people engaged and react to what I post, always in the service of the topic at hand. It works, so get over it.

Why did I post the supposed Guide To Rape Drugs? Lists and Usenet contain lots of stuff, but once it's on the Web people actually read it and know about it. People need to know that there are people out there who promote this shit. Ninety percent of people reading that "article" are going to learn something about the topic and will be better able to protect themselves.

Most of the stuff I put on my blog can be found in other places if you know where to look. The Guide To Rape Drugs, which I didn't write, is part of the Google USENET archive, posted many many many times; search for yourself. There are worse things than that in Google Groups, especially in the alt.sex hierarchy.

As far as the post being a self link, that wasn't the intention, actually, even though I don't mind self-links. I don't care about the traffic that much, and being on awful icky blogspot I can't track the hits. I just ripped the George and Laura thing from Michael Moore's e-newsletter and stuck it on my page because I liked it. Yes, I should indicate who wrote what; I'm working on that, but raking muck isn't my full-time gig.
posted by johnnydark at 1:06 PM on September 17, 2003


even though I don't mind self-links

And that's what counts!
posted by languagehat at 1:16 PM on September 17, 2003


That all you have to say, languagehat?
posted by johnnydark at 1:23 PM on September 17, 2003


I use hyperbole, sarcasm and humour to get people engaged and react to what I post, always in the service of the topic at hand. It works, so get over it.

Yeah, trolling sometimes gets the best discussions going. Usually it just gets people mouthing off though.

I never have thought MetaFilter was that good of a place to troll. The format just doesn't work. You need to be able to bring multiple sites into it or something. Plus you are limited to one name to use, mostly and it is just harder to be the random shit-stirrer.

Despite that a good portion of the newsgroups on Usenet are dead or nearly so, (most of the professionals and truly in-the-know posters long ago abandoned the sci, rec and other non-alt groups) you could still have a good time trolling if you really wanted. With a few related groups and one entirely unrelated group + a moderately well written rant that pushes all the right buttons without being TOO over the top....

Just doesn't work here on MetaFilter. Not the same way at least. Plus if you are ever moderately successful you are going to get banned. :P
posted by bargle at 1:41 PM on September 17, 2003


Awwwwww. He self-linked to copied text. He's such a trouble-maker who makes us think.

Isn't he adorable?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 1:42 PM on September 17, 2003


Only an idiot would claim that everybody here is an idiot. Unless you're just trolling - oh, sorry, being provocative.

When I jump, I want to make a point.

But you won't - you'll make a big ugly splotch that someone else will have to clean up, just as you've done here.
posted by soyjoy at 2:08 PM on September 17, 2003


I will self link within this thread. I now own (Thanks to Fellow MeFite Matt Pfeff) all the available Blogshares for MetaFilter. It is availble for (via a sell order) $2,000,000,000,000.00

You people look like ants to me!
posted by thirteen at 3:03 PM on September 17, 2003


Of all the things you've said thus far, having the audacity to compare your situation to people who had to jump from a burning building is by far the most distasteful. And that's having read some of the incredibly distasteful things you've plagiarized on your blog and/or user page.
posted by jacquilynne at 3:10 PM on September 17, 2003


When I jump, I want to make a point

Try a funnel. Beyond that, after-the-fact justifications of your user page seem tacked on to me. Maybe a little invisible disclaimer in a comment or something that says, "Made you think, didn't it." That way, if we're not careful, we might learn something before you're done.
posted by yerfatma at 3:12 PM on September 17, 2003


So what is the prescribed way for linking to a chunk of text that is making the rounds in email, for example?

chunks of text making the rounds via email. they do that?
posted by quonsar at 3:18 PM on September 17, 2003


"You love to censor speech that you think is somehow dangerous, or hateful, or even rude. That's lame."

No. It's the way communities work.

I sincerely compliment you for your mission to expose people to scary ideas. Buteven if I decide to take what you've said at face value, closed communities are entitled set there own rules. That's just reality. And you may feel that a community which tries to stifle ugly things makes itself less healthy in the process, but I'm going to preemptively call bullshit on that one.

You, sir, are full of shit.

1) There are plenty of scary, dangerous, hateful, and even rude things posted here on a very regular basis. It's not that we, as a community refuse to allow such things, and we certainly don't censor them.

2) There is little, and arguably no, censorship here. You remain. The links to everything we've discussed remain. The conversation remains. Your stuff is being shouted down because people just don't feel it's worth the bother. And yes, yes, you can go on all you want about how being shouted down equals censorship, but it just doesn't. So get over it.

3) If your goal was to expose ideas you wouldn't try so hard to marginalize the discussion. Most people here, or at least certainly enough for a robust thread, would be happy to discuss rape drugs. It's not the topic. It's you. And I think you know that.

So what are we left with? You seem smart enough to know what you're doing, so I can only conclude that you're in it for the thrill. The mission to force us to confront scary things is just a rationalization. You want to believe that you are provocative and edgy. Trust me, you are not. We happen to really enjoy provocative and edgy here. You want to believe you are exposing us to new ideas. You aren't. You are just indulging yourself.

"when the speech in question doesn't make you uncomfortable or annoyed."

See, this makes me think you don't even read MetaFilter. Most everyone here is either uncomfortable or annoyed every time they're on the site.

No, I think it's you. Your new ideas just don't make the cut.
posted by y6y6y6 at 3:19 PM on September 17, 2003


I apologize for my post, I did not realize it was a serious discussion. I thought it was one of those stream of consciousness things that are popular with the 5 digit people.
posted by thirteen at 3:26 PM on September 17, 2003


I'm uncomfortable *and* annoyed.
posted by timeistight at 3:42 PM on September 17, 2003


I'm annoyed and uncomfortable.

OK, I went a little far with my concern that MeFi is still linked to johnydark's site. I certainly have no qualms with disturbing content on the web, with one condition - that it have some purpose. A site that contains, among other things, a story glorifying the rape of a 16 year-old girl (fictional, I know, but still..) is disturbing just for the shock value of the story, rather than making any point. The whole site disturbs me a great deal for some reason that I can not put my finger on.

johnydark, your comment that you did not intend to self-link is a load of crap. You have been around long enough to know better. You know what a self-link is and you went ahead and did it anyway. If something exists other than on the web that you want to provide a link to, you do not have the right to put it on the web and then link it here. You may think that is unfair and it is censorship, but it's not - it is one of the few rules here that is never OK to break. If it is that important, buy a text ad. If it is so important and you cannot or will not buy a text ad, put it on your site and someone will find it and link it. If not, perhaps it was not that important anyway (apart from to you, perhaps). The interview you posted could have made for an interesting discussion, but you blew it.
posted by dg at 4:12 PM on September 17, 2003


I thought it was one of those stream of consciousness things that are popular with the 5 digit people.

Yeah, get with the times!
posted by pizzasub at 4:14 PM on September 17, 2003


People need to know that there are people out there who promote this shit.

That's certainly how I view your guide to rape drugs. If I'm wrong I apologise. If not, go and see a psychiatrist.
posted by Tarrama at 7:33 PM on September 17, 2003


closed communities are entitled set there own rules.

And members of those communities are entitled to promote and agitate for changes in the rules. We are autonomous, cooperative units, not programmed servile drones.

I have not looked at the link(s) in question, but in general the promotion of security through obscurity has been shown again and again to be a bad idea. Know thy enemy, don't turn thy face from him and hum showtunes.
posted by rushmc at 5:27 AM on September 18, 2003


We have met the enemy and he is us.
posted by timeistight at 8:47 AM on September 18, 2003


get a good pack mentality going on metafilter and all sorts of people come crawling out of the wood work - with their indignant suburban anger bubbling over.

come on people show so class, this is waaaay too easy.

woof! woof!
what's that lassie, these people suck?
woof!
posted by carfilhiot at 9:34 AM on September 18, 2003


Care to be specific about who these angry suburbanites are, cafiliot?
posted by timeistight at 10:05 AM on September 18, 2003


er…carfilhiot, that is.
posted by timeistight at 10:23 AM on September 18, 2003


:) don't worry tit, not you. canadians are cool!

woof! woof!
what lassie? zekinskia is big angry suburbanite?
woof! woof!
well ok, but i didn't know doggytalk had a word for fuckwit.
woof!
posted by carfilhiot at 10:44 AM on September 18, 2003


woof! woof!

carfilhiot's own version of "wappa! wappa!"
posted by soyjoy at 10:46 AM on September 18, 2003


zekinskia hasn't said a word here.
posted by dgaicun at 12:36 PM on September 18, 2003


What do the suburbs have to do with any of this?
posted by dhoyt at 1:18 PM on September 18, 2003


Thanks for the insight, soyjoy. I was presuming a case where an honorable person has a worthy chunk of text and needs to figure out how to post it. But you're right, permitting a self-link in that case would create a bad incentive many would abuse.

Jonnydark: please.
posted by scarabic at 9:28 AM on September 19, 2003


zekinskia hasn't said a word here.

wappa! wappa!
Lassie is a bit busy right now. But his spokesman says that he stands by his sources. I guess you're just not in the know eh?
posted by carfilhiot at 8:42 AM on September 21, 2003


dgaicun, carfilhiot's fictional dog (which, BTW, begs the question of who over there is actually "busy") is referring to OT remarks zekinskia made on johnnyD's latest thread, remarks which were removed leaving no residue, thus leading to the current confusion.
posted by soyjoy at 9:33 AM on September 22, 2003


I support your campaign for deleted comment residue, soyjoy.
posted by dgaicun at 8:54 PM on September 22, 2003


Maybe we could use strikeout?
posted by timeistight at 9:25 PM on September 22, 2003


« Older Salon's feature on Perverted Justices quotes...   |   Tokyo Meetup Newer »

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