Effect of MeFi on content April 12, 2004 10:39 PM   Subscribe

Altering the web in real time. Lately there have been some interesting examples of how a post on metafilter has caused change to the source immediately after it was posted. Millionforchrist made changes to it's stated privacy policy within an hour after being mentioned. Someone speculated a domain out from under this ask.me question, and also the whole real-time debate with LGF thread. What are some other recent examples of this kind of thing?
posted by milovoo to MetaFilter-Related at 10:39 PM (29 comments total)

Obviously, there is the slashdot effect for some sites, but these are much more interesting examples and I'm sure there are plenty more. Also, does anyone recall any examples from the "olden days" of metafilter?
posted by milovoo at 10:44 PM on April 12, 2004


Third rule of MetaFilter: Any post deleted so as not to cause controversy will be linked to in no less than three MetaTalk posts.
posted by Space Coyote at 11:09 PM on April 12, 2004


Fourth rule of Metafilter : I don't want to catch anybody not drinking. [/pythongeek]
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:20 PM on April 12, 2004


I don't know about recently, but there was at least one occasion when a site stole some of mathowie's design work, and the Horde descended.

There was also the classic 'we have cameras' thread.

Also, Matt's adventures in googlebombing, back when it was a new idea ('somethingorother sucks' was link text, I believe) had echoes far and wide.

Sorry, no links. I'm lazy.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:35 PM on April 12, 2004


And then Metafilter.com said to Biff Tannen, "Hey you, get your damn hands off her..."
posted by namespan at 11:46 PM on April 12, 2004


Any post deleted so as not to cause controversy will be linked to in no less than three MetaTalk posts.

I did link to the discussion instead of the original thread,
so as not to exacerbate any problems, but I see your point.
posted by milovoo at 11:52 PM on April 12, 2004


The domain in question was registered in 1999 so I don't think anyone sharked it out from under Dobbs.

>> Moviesnob.com
>>
>> Registrant:
>> Montana Banana Web Design
>> Seattle, WA 98107
>> US
>>
>> Domain name: MOVIESNOB.COM
>>
>> Record expires on 02-Apr-2005.
>> Record created on 02-Apr-1999.
posted by Tenuki at 12:15 AM on April 13, 2004


Yeah ive got a few: Every website rips us off because our links are too good.
posted by Keyser Soze at 12:30 AM on April 13, 2004


Is this a question I'd have to surf the internet to answer?

That's right, I'm better than all of you! My limited posting history was created by a team of crack (head) engineers. NOBODY IS PILOTING THIS SHIP.
posted by The God Complex at 12:33 AM on April 13, 2004


The 123CheapHosting debacle that Stavros is referring to was dicussed here, and samples were archived here.

Also, let's not forget Kaycee Nicole.
posted by Johnny Assay at 6:39 AM on April 13, 2004


That use to be the case Keyser, but every blog in a million miles of here typically has the links before MeFi. Unfortunately it's become a daily list of what's on Blogdex. That's why I no longer visit there.
posted by mkelley at 8:01 AM on April 13, 2004


That's why I no longer visit there.

You no longer visit there! And yet you are there? * brain explodes *
posted by PrinceValium at 9:23 AM on April 13, 2004


no no no, I don't visit the blue. I just visit the subdomains of mefi proper.
posted by mkelley at 10:21 AM on April 13, 2004


So you prefer the grey to the blue, mkelley? Hmmm... location: Chatanooga, TN. That explains it. Those damn Confederates never go away...

*brain doesn't explode, but melts down slightly* :)
posted by wendell at 11:36 AM on April 13, 2004


Serious question: Now that it does seem clear that something shady was going on with MillionforChrist.com (not to mention the related sites), and that a new user registered here to market to us, is there anything that we should do about it to warn others?
posted by onlyconnect at 3:37 PM on April 13, 2004


I suppose we could try and summon the power of blogdom to meme this guy a new asshole.

Where "we" connotes "people besides me, people with friends and blogs and POWER, POWER TO WREAK VENGENCE etc"
posted by cortex at 4:16 PM on April 13, 2004


Well, for the sake of the search engines, I think that it would be helpful for us to definitely link the name "thebettercompany" and "thebettercompany.com" when we are talking about things such as the likelihood of millionforchrist.com being nothing more than a spam trap and a scam, and when discussing the fact that Paul Emmer of thebettercompany.com signed up for a MetaFilter membership under an anonymous name just to post and promote said spam trap and scam via viral marketing, and when wondering if lying and taking advantage of people both in this way and by preying on their religious faith to put money in his pocket is really good Christian behavior.
posted by taz at 4:20 PM on April 13, 2004


So, what you are saying is that we should definitely link the name "thebettercompany" and "thebettercompany.com" when we are talking about things such as the likelihood of millionforchrist.com being nothing more than a spam trap and a scam, and when discussing the fact that Paul Emmer of thebettercompany.com signed up for a MetaFilter membership under an anonymous name just to post and promote said spam trap and scam via viral marketing, and when wondering if lying and taking advantage of people both in this way and by preying on their religious faith to put money in his pocket is really good Christian behavior?
posted by dg at 4:44 PM on April 13, 2004


Web pages change, film at 11.
posted by zpousman at 6:39 PM on April 13, 2004


Is it a good idea to mention the name Paul Emmer with monkeyfucking ratbastard? When people google for "email address list review", and see the name "Paul Emmer", should they also see monkeyfucking ratbastard in the search results?

Here's some fodder for Google: email address list harvesting spam paul emmer monkeyfucking ratbastard.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:38 PM on April 13, 2004


Hey! Leave the monkeys out of it. Bastard.
posted by yhbc at 7:57 PM on April 13, 2004


Wait, Paul Emmer is a scammer, a spammer, and a sleazebucket?
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 8:46 PM on April 13, 2004


Yes, Paul Emmer scams, spams, and sleazes buckets. He tried to do some email address list harvesting, the ratbastard. He did not, I repeat did not, fuck the monkeys.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:45 PM on April 13, 2004


Oh. My. God. Sorry, ratbastard. Didn't mean to impugn your fine name.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:48 PM on April 13, 2004


Web pages change, film at 11.

Obviously, but it's somewhat different when metafilter ends up in the role of investigative journalist.

search for the millionforchrist.com bettercompany.com Paul Emmer spam scam

posted by milovoo at 8:01 AM on April 14, 2004


The guy seems honestly contrite, and it appears it was just a humongous misjudgement on his part, compounded by overzealous enthusiasm for his "cause."

Which I, personally, find understandable. I can't imagine he'll make such an error again.

Matt, if you're into the spirit of forgiveness, feel free to delete my monkeyfucking posts. I kind of regret them, now that it appears he really is just some guy, and not the nefarious, evil-doing, ratbastard sort of email address harvester that I'd normally wish to dip in dogshit.

On the other hand, I still have a hint of distrust of the guy; the whole contriteness thing could be an act. I hope not.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:42 AM on April 14, 2004


I have to say, I'm not impressed. He's still harvesting addresses, like it was just too good of an idea to give up on. He has the spam mentality which is use others however you can to get your message out and I don't get the impression that this has gone away.

Although some of the more malicious comments hurt our feelings, we forgive the people who made them.

And primarily he's willing to forgive others? Perhaps when all the controversy blows over he can just get rid of that link and go back to the original plan.

There are thousands of church organizations and charities that unite members in many different ways, and all of them do it without running a spam site on the side. I'll bet all those christian debt management places I keep getting spam about would make a hefty donation for a peek at that list (and forgive us our debts at about 12.5%).
posted by milovoo at 11:33 AM on April 14, 2004


fff, I'm astonished you're willing to forgive and forget so easily. Didn't you read that comment about how other spammers pull this contrite act? As far as I'm concerned, he's a jerk with a good line of Christian patter, and I'll have to see a lot more evidence for good faith before I even consider changing my mind.
posted by languagehat at 5:50 PM on April 14, 2004


I dunno. Maybe I'm just horribly gullible.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:40 PM on April 14, 2004


« Older The post is bad the discussion isnt any better   |   Great Comment Newer »

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