Call the Waaah-mbulance

June 18, 2004 8:03 AM

Waah!Filter : Talk about posting your petty grievances in the Blue! Heheh.
posted by mischief to MetaFilter-Related at 8:03 AM (47 comments total)

As a wise man once said: It might as well have been titled "This is today's senseless bickering thread". No real content, just more trollish junk. ;-P
posted by mischief at 8:04 AM on June 18, 2004

Talk about posting your petty grievances in the Blue!

Adding you to my Anal Twit list.

And, while I'm at it:

.
posted by Danelope at 8:15 AM on June 18, 2004

posting "todayspapers" in every single thread isn't helping, either.
posted by amberglow at 8:23 AM on June 18, 2004

Eh?
posted by DrJohnEvans at 8:23 AM on June 18, 2004

Can't we just have a news.metafilter.com? Since ask.metafilter.com seems to have gone well. Actually, that's probably the kind of thing that's been suggested a thousand times before, so meh.
posted by reklaw at 8:24 AM on June 18, 2004

I sense a dancing competition is about to ensue between the two opposing sides.

All I know is, somebody's about to get served. Like on they do it on the streets.
posted by Stan Chin at 8:36 AM on June 18, 2004

mischief, I am impressed by the fact that you have chosen to forgo your customary emoticon, and expressed your outrage and emotional disturbance with an intense and, well, I have to say, harrowing 'Heheh'.

I'm not sure if I can say more through my tears. I am overcome.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:41 AM on June 18, 2004

This should stop. The newsfilter call outs, the constant bitching and the name calling. It's been said many times before, but I'm going go out on a limb and predict the imminent demise of Metafilter if this childish vendetta driven crap doesn't stop. Yep, your a bunch of smart cynical bastards who have mastered the art of snark. Good for you. Now stop ruining it for everyone else and keep your attitude out of the blue.

Notice that I did not call for a halt to newsfilter posts. That ship has sailed and whatever happened to voting with your feet (uh... mouse)? I have no opinion about newsfilter per se, discussion about topics being discussed everyplace else from my dining room table to five hundred other websites does not interest me, so I don't read them. It's really very easy.

Hey, here's a thought. Metafilter is not mandatory reading for any rational human being. If it upsets you, don't fucking read it.
posted by cedar at 9:29 AM on June 18, 2004

predict the imminent demise of Metafilter if this childish vendetta driven crap doesn't stop.

Yes, this Sicilian thing has to end!
posted by jonmc at 9:42 AM on June 18, 2004

If I could for a moment bring up the posting characteristics of one y2karl...
posted by xmutex at 9:42 AM on June 18, 2004

Metafilter is not mandatory reading for any rational human being.

But think of the irrational ones, forced to read it day after day!

xmutex: No. Can we for once discuss something without dragging in every personal gripe anybody's got about anybody else?
posted by languagehat at 9:47 AM on June 18, 2004

reklaw: I had the same thought this morning. On further consideration it really isn't about posts in the news though. Cries of 'newsfilter', 'todaysnewsfilter' and 'this is a shit post' appear on just about any post on which someone might be ideologically offended.

Maybe something like antiparty.metafilter.com, where you are allowed to bring up those topics that you are not supposed to bring up at parties (i.e., politics, religion, etc), would fit the bill.
posted by moonbiter at 9:53 AM on June 18, 2004

I think that was a joke.
posted by yerfatma at 9:53 AM on June 18, 2004

Ironic how everyone missed the satire in that post, which differed not at all from the other arrogant demands in type, only in degree.
posted by rushmc at 9:53 AM on June 18, 2004

Although antiparty is cumbersome. Maybe fauxpas.metafilter.com? Suggestions?
posted by moonbiter at 9:54 AM on June 18, 2004

xmutex's comment, I mean.
posted by yerfatma at 9:54 AM on June 18, 2004

yerfatmama - yer right. I thought it was hilarious.

rush - If it was a "satirical" post, then it belongs at satire.metafilter.com, not on the front page.

Its demise was only unfortunate in that we missed the chance to sort out whether the correct appelation is "Chihuahua Bob" or "Bob the Chihuahua"? Oh! I know, I'll start another MeTa thread about that, and we can discuss it endlessly. Hang on...
posted by soyjoy at 10:59 AM on June 18, 2004

Hey, soyjoy: http://satire.metafilter.com/

Heheh.
posted by punishinglemur at 11:50 AM on June 18, 2004

All subdomains are like that, except for the ones that go to actual subdomains. The results of an old thread I am too lazy to look up and link to. I thought it was funny with the news. metafilter.com subdomain.

Seriously though, the fact that posts like the one we saw today calling those of us who like 'newsfilter' posts 'assholes' showed up in the blue is a sign of a problem. I would like to see and actual 'news' or 'issues' subdomain show up, so at least I don't have to read through the comments of some self-appointed Metafilter cop telling us what a good post is and isn't.

Seriously, I don't know if there is any middle ground here. I simply cannot understand why folks can't just skip over the posts they don't like. I've tried, and I can't: Why is it I don't feel the need to write 'shit post' in every Flash friday thread I have no interest in (which is almost all of them)? Why do others feel the need to do so in threads they don't like? I just cannot fathom that type of thinking.

So maybe we do free-for-all.metafilter.com, where whiners aren't allowed. Or maybe the constant trolling is just fatiguing me.
posted by moonbiter at 12:02 PM on June 18, 2004

It is difficult to fathom, moonbiter, but I think some folks must really dislike being confronted with issues they don't like to know about. Plenty of people (hell, most?) are addicted to Metafilter. It's hard to stop hitting that front page...but it must generate some kind of cognitive dissidence when, in contrast to every other weblog an ideologically-obsessive user might see on a daily basis, it contains some links they don't "agree" with. Clearly some form of mild mental weakness. You wonder if they get a severe nervous twitch when flicking past the opposing left-wing or right-wing news channel on TV.

For instance, I avoid visiting weblogs that contains content that disturbs me (generally viscious, ranting, xenophobic stuff)...however I always notice that some people can't help but visit and shit in the comments of their ideological nemeses, rather than just ignoring the whole damn site. Metafilter is just this problem condensed onto a single page.
posted by Jimbob at 1:34 PM on June 18, 2004

cognitive dissidence

You mean cognitive dissonance perhaps? A cognitive dissident sounds like a PC term for a lunatic. Or a Mac user.
posted by boaz at 1:46 PM on June 18, 2004

Maybe we need little tags to the left of each post calling out PoliticsFilter / NewsFilter / GoogleFilter / AppleFilter / FlashFilter / etc sort of like Fark does. Fark didn't get to be one of Time Magazine's top 5 bloggers to watch for nothin.

Complaining about too many political and/or news posts would be like complaining about too many cat questions on AskMe. They pop up and non-cat-people can ignore them. Of course when the cat vs. dog elections come it might get ugly.
posted by birdherder at 2:06 PM on June 18, 2004

Time Magazine's top 5 bloggers to watch

Yeah, that's the ticket. If only this place was more like Fark.
posted by soyjoy at 2:22 PM on June 18, 2004

Cos, like, that's a blog. Like.
posted by dash_slot- at 3:04 PM on June 18, 2004

boaz: Heh, yeah, dissonance. My excuse is that I posted my previous comment at about 6:04am local time. Then I came back after a couple more hours sleep to see you'd confirmed the fears I had about my spelling mistake.
posted by Jimbob at 3:39 PM on June 18, 2004

Fark didn't get to be one of Time Magazine's top 5 bloggers to watch for nothin.
Would have posted this Tuesday if Meta-Filter was mentioned.
posted by thomcatspike at 4:08 PM on June 18, 2004

rush - If it was a "satirical" post, then it belongs at satire.metafilter.com, not on the front page.

I wasn't suggesting that it was appropriate.
posted by rushmc at 4:56 PM on June 18, 2004

Metafilter is just this problem condensed onto a single page.

I think that's a good analysis of the problem.

It's also a description of what I like about Metafilter in a sense: the fact that I can get to read viewpoints of a lot of intelligent, insightful people without having to visit 100 different blogs. That's one of the thing that gets me about people that cry 'get your own blog' (besides the insinuation that this is their personal blog, and they can run people they don't like off by shouting loud enough). I like the fact that some of this is organized in one place. I can filter out the posts about poets and flash sites much more easily than I can visit a number of different blogs.

Maybe we need little tags to the left of each post calling out PoliticsFilter / NewsFilter / GoogleFilter / AppleFilter / FlashFilter / etc sort of like Fark does.

Sadly I don't think that will help, mainly because:

1. In most posts it's already obvious what it's tag would be by it's wording.
2. This doesn't prevent people from entering them and commenting that they don't like them.

It seems to me the only way to minimize the number of people whining about whether or not a particular post is part of the 'best of the web' or not is to set up a no-whine zone, where any post is considered okay (within certain parameters, like illegal ones being out-of-bounds -- I don't think anyone here wants to see 'pr0nfilter'). Simply taking them off the Blue and putting them in their own subdomain would help, so that those who cannot bear to see something they don't agree with don't have to see it.
posted by moonbiter at 6:23 PM on June 18, 2004

Just to clarify: My comment about making Metafilter more like Fark was not meant to be taken seriously. I thought the link to the Time magazine post that was ridiculed to death would have been enough of a hint.

Apparently, people need to upgrade to a browser that supports the <sarcasm> tag.

Metafilter does fine with just a few newsfilter, politicsfilter, and so on posted per day. People who don't want or like that should just move along. The way Matt is running things is just fine by me.
posted by birdherder at 6:37 PM on June 18, 2004

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=joke

Learning is fun gang!

Me personally, I find newsfilter annoying as hell for the simple reason that I watch the news and I get enough current events from it. The main reason someone post national/worldwide news here is to wave their political dick around and try to see who sucks it (or bites it). Or they're just oblivious to the entire point of mefi. And then when people object, as the should, we get the usually pansys crying that they just want to politically censor the poster. Simply put, I don't know how this became acceptable and why matt isn't deleting bullshit cnn/routers posts. They have no place the blue. It would be one thing to see an interesting piece that I didn't know about, but when I watch cnn then see the same story on mefi, it's just pitiful.

And to those who say "hey Chihuahua bob, you're new, you dont deserve to bitch about anything!!" I say fuck you. I'm just that kinda guy.
posted by bob sarabia at 7:49 PM on June 18, 2004

Just to clarify: My comment about making Metafilter more like Fark was not meant to be taken seriously.

It's hard to tell what's funny and what's not recently. My apologies.

Still, this is an issue that needs to be addressed, and shouting "stop posting links I find uninteresting" as some seem to be doing isn't the best way to handle it.
posted by moonbiter at 8:11 PM on June 18, 2004

Or they're just oblivious to the entire point of mefi.

From the guy who thinks posting "joke" posts on the front page calling people assholes is part of the point.
posted by soyjoy at 8:11 PM on June 18, 2004

And to those who say "hey Chihuahua bob, you're new, you dont deserve to bitch about anything!!" I say fuck you. I'm just that kinda guy.

Thank you for that communication.
posted by y2karl at 9:47 PM on June 18, 2004

Can we have a moratorium on bob sarabia? Perhaps a long one?
posted by The God Complex at 10:27 PM on June 18, 2004

Seconded.
posted by mmcg at 5:31 AM on June 19, 2004

Roman L. Hruska's remarks regarding G. Harrold Carswell come to mind.
posted by y2karl at 7:05 AM on June 19, 2004

This one's for stav: ;-P
posted by mischief at 12:51 PM on June 19, 2004

when I watch cnn then see the same story on mefi : Stop watching CNN then.
posted by mischief at 1:04 PM on June 19, 2004

So what's wrong with newsfilter?

Sure, Metafilter was originally intended as a place to put unique links. But, like any institution with a sustainable population and an extended lifespan, it hass evolved to have a different purpose.

For Metafilter, the discussion has become as important (if not more important) as the links.

So, whats wrong with newsfilter posts when the intent is not to share new information but to discuss the latest news/outrage/scandal with your friends/arch-enemies in the blue?
posted by pandaharma at 6:46 PM on June 19, 2004

I don't think the problem is so much that people want to discuss new issues in the first place, so much as the daily eruption of the same old arguments. I mean, there's not a helluva lotta difference between an Iraq thread from right now and one from February, 2003, except for the odd "But we caught Saddam!" or "What about Abu Ghraib?" If there is some genuinely new information or perspective to share, fine--although I'm probably gonna skip the thread anyway--but I don't really see the point of rehashing the same points over and over again until it degenerates to the inevitable namecalling/MeTa-callout stage.

But hell, maybe I'm wrong and the fight IS the point.
posted by arto at 12:02 PM on June 20, 2004

Of course the fight is the point, arto. Don't forget that they're americans; politics is a blood sport to them.
posted by timeistight at 1:49 PM on June 20, 2004

Don't forget that they're americans; politics is a blood sport to them.

Exactly! We americans have not yet evolved politically as far as other, more exalted nations.
posted by mischief at 2:09 PM on June 20, 2004

I didn't say that mischief. I just said you like to fight about it.

I don't whether that's less evolved or more.
posted by timeistight at 2:16 PM on June 20, 2004

Cockroaches are highly evolved.
posted by euphorb at 3:43 PM on June 20, 2004

There is no such thing as "more" or "less" evolved.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 5:19 PM on June 20, 2004

Yeah, mischief! It's not that you haven't evolved as far. You just evolved in the wrong direction.

There is no such thing as evolving in a "wrong" direction.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:19 PM PST on June 20
posted by timeistight at 6:52 PM on June 20, 2004

Right.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:17 PM on June 20, 2004