Was this user banned? July 9, 2004 10:32 AM   Subscribe

has 111 been banned ?
posted by sgt.serenity to Feature Requests at 10:32 AM (99 comments total)

something for the weekend , i havent seen him lately and a search yields nothing.
posted by sgt.serenity at 10:33 AM on July 9, 2004


Have you thought of the drawers in the bureau?
posted by DrJohnEvans at 10:41 AM on July 9, 2004


111
posted by hama7 at 11:03 AM on July 9, 2004


Matt would be the only one to know, yes?
posted by dhoyt at 11:21 AM on July 9, 2004


shhh. don't mention his name; it might conjure him back from whatever dark repose shields us from his malign presence.
posted by Mars Saxman at 11:31 AM on July 9, 2004


Am I the only one who thinks that it's pretty amusing that ss classified this as a feature request?
posted by LittleMissCranky at 11:45 AM on July 9, 2004


He's not banned. He's just sleeping!
posted by scody at 11:45 AM on July 9, 2004


111
111
111

Anything?
posted by yerfatma at 11:49 AM on July 9, 2004


He's been sleeping since late May, if that is indeed the case.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 11:56 AM on July 9, 2004


It takes a lot of energy to hate like that. I'm sure he's just hibernating.

Or maybe someone took him to a gay bar, gay bar, gay bar.
posted by chicobangs at 12:05 PM on July 9, 2004


Speaking of hate: the debate on the Federal Marriage Amendment is starting today in Congress. Call your Senators: 1-877-762-8762 or 202-225-3121, or find their direct numbers here.

Do it for 111. ; >
posted by amberglow at 12:26 PM on July 9, 2004


He's not banned. He's just sleeping!

He's pining for the fjords.
posted by jokeefe at 12:26 PM on July 9, 2004


I have banned 111 and here was the reason. I enjoy his colorful banter as much as the next person, but he was beginning to move into Ask MetaFilter in a big way, posting off-topic, entirely help-free comments about "commies" and other such nonsense on questions that had nothing to do with politics. When I had to delete the fifth or sixth useless joke comment about it, I went looking for his email address and he didn't have one in his account.

Normally, I email folks to request they stop what they are doing and explain what they're doing that's wrong. When they don't have an email address, I have put bans in place which often results in an email from the person asking about the ban. I need to speak with 111, and I had no recourse when he didn't have an email attached to his account. I haven't heard from him since, but unless I can contact him and explain the situation, I'm not going to lift the ban.

On the signup page, email is clearly marked as required for communication of lost passwords and the occasional note from me, but 111 chose to blank his out. I should put something in place to make sure emails can't be cleared out because from time to time this presents a problem such as this.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 12:52 PM on July 9, 2004


the system doesn't hold old data then? I'd have thought it was fairly easy to stick a table on that virtually never got used, holding old contact details...
posted by twine42 at 1:05 PM on July 9, 2004


Doesn't seem to be much of a problem, Matt. Blanking out your email with a "don't contact me" mentality is tantamount to giving the site the finger. Bannination is a fine first resort in such cases.
posted by PrinceValium at 1:29 PM on July 9, 2004


*pours out something suitably fruity for 111*
posted by WolfDaddy at 1:49 PM on July 9, 2004


*mourns the loss of both trollery and diversity of opinion*
posted by trharlan at 1:54 PM on July 9, 2004


I once received an email from Matt. I wondered what I could have possibly done wrong, because I had been away from the site for a couple weeks. As it happened, he was just asking me a question.

This story wasn't quite so boring before I wrote it.
posted by mischief at 1:55 PM on July 9, 2004


*raises glass with wolfdaddy*
posted by jokeefe at 1:58 PM on July 9, 2004


In an ironic, queer sort of way, of course.
posted by jokeefe at 1:59 PM on July 9, 2004


*delicately sips his cosmopolitan*
posted by The God Complex at 2:01 PM on July 9, 2004


well , unruly boys who will not grow , they MUST be taken in hand.

- can i have a pink umbrella in my pina colada ?
posted by sgt.serenity at 2:58 PM on July 9, 2004


This story wasn't quite so boring before I wrote it.

That's because you left out the part where after opening the email, everyone thought you were this wanted criminal and you had to race against time to prove your innocence. Oh no, wait, that wasn't your story. Never mind, you're right.
posted by Stoatfarm at 3:03 PM on July 9, 2004


I don't recall seeing Space Cadet around lately either.
*hoists Laphroaig*
posted by clever sheep at 3:05 PM on July 9, 2004


*pours brown sauce for amber*
posted by sgt.serenity at 3:07 PM on July 9, 2004


*pours brown sauce for amber*

Hey! don't waste it in his honor! jeez!
posted by amberglow at 3:42 PM on July 9, 2004


you're right : My reputation shot down with just two little words. ;-P
posted by mischief at 3:58 PM on July 9, 2004


*pours a 40 on keybbbbbb
posted by kirkaracha at 4:52 PM on July 9, 2004


shhh. don't mention his name; it might conjure him back from whatever dark repose shields us from his malign presence.

That only happens when you say it backwards.
posted by homunculus at 5:18 PM on July 9, 2004


he's really brian eno ?
posted by sgt.serenity at 5:25 PM on July 9, 2004


he was beginning to move into Ask MetaFilter in a big way, posting off-topic, entirely help-free comments about "commies" and other such nonsense on questions that had nothing to do with politics.

That's really too bad. I cannot comprehend the amount of time it must consume to maintain a site like this, and for that, I know I'm not alone in expressing my gratitude to mathowie. Many.

An e-mail account takes mere moments to set up, and would eliminate situations such as these.
posted by hama7 at 5:35 PM on July 9, 2004


Shoot. I was just about to make a joke, but on preview, all I'll say is that I agree with hama7. Thanks for keeping the site functional, despite all the disfunctional people in it, Matt.
posted by yhbc at 5:38 PM on July 9, 2004


gone gone gone.
posted by sgt.serenity at 6:05 PM on July 9, 2004


and the joke I was going to post was ...

has sgt.serenity been banned ?
posted by yhbc at 6:11 PM on July 9, 2004


An e-mail account takes mere moments to set up, and would eliminate situations such as these.

111 wouldn't have been a suckass troll if he had an e-mail account?
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 6:13 PM on July 9, 2004


please ban all people funnier than me matt.
posted by sgt.serenity at 6:30 PM on July 9, 2004


yeah, people who don't put their email addresses on their metafilter profiles should be fucking banned.
posted by angry modem at 6:49 PM on July 9, 2004


As should all bad motherfuckers.
posted by jmd82 at 8:10 PM on July 9, 2004


I fucking concur.
posted by Jimbob at 8:25 PM on July 9, 2004


Pluck Yew!!
posted by Stynxno at 8:37 PM on July 9, 2004


He should have known better. From experience, it's hard to get banned here. Obviously Matt has been very open about the opportunity for him to come back if they can work it out with each other. I cannot think of a nicer moderator, in fact.
posted by Keyser Soze at 8:40 PM on July 9, 2004


I thought 111 was a sock puppet account. I was pretty damn sure of it, in fact.

I don't think we've lost a user so much as broken a mirror.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:31 PM on July 9, 2004


He should have known better.

Indeed he should have - people have been making a point of his lack of email address for months. Came back and bit him in the bean bag, didn't it?
posted by Jimbob at 11:06 PM on July 9, 2004


You know, there were probably other ways to contact him than his email account -- a little message that rejects his login and explains why he's been banned, for example. Just banning him because he chooses not to give out his email address wasn't the way to deal with the situation, if you ask me -- and someone had to say it, because there's too much sycophancy around here by half.
posted by reklaw at 11:10 PM on July 9, 2004


Good thing we've got rugged individualists like you around to set things straight, then!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:24 PM on July 9, 2004


Yeah, very amusing. I guess I just haven't been around quite long enough to drink the mefi kool-aid, or something.
posted by reklaw at 11:29 PM on July 9, 2004


reklaw, i don't see why matt should have to recode the site to include personal messages to folks who abuse their priviledges and refuse to include an email. one doesn't lose anything by having a free web based email acct listed in their profile - you can set it in your profile so it doesn't show to anyone but matt.

if you want to belong to a community website where you're allowed an incredible amount of trollish behaviour before the admin does anything about it, you should be happy to give that admin a way of contacting you. unless of course you don't give a shit about your membership.

what baffles me is that he was banned for dicking around in precious askme, and not for any of his raging irrational hate spewing in the blue and grey. makes me wonder.

I thought 111 was a sock puppet account. I was pretty damn sure of it, in fact.

i've always thought 111 was Witty.

(hmm, spellcheck isn't working again, for me, in firefox 0.9.1)
posted by t r a c y at 11:32 PM on July 9, 2004


if you ask me -- and someone had to say it, because there's too much sycophancy around here by half.

Are you talking about exaggerated politenness to the site owner and our host, by any chance? 'Cause if one goes swimming in a neighbor's pool, it's only natural to want to be nice to him or her and his or her guests.

As for anyone else, people have those they like and those they don't--positives wins over negatives there just as in real life. Mostly, we are individuals who are strangers, for the most part, to each other. Parties of one. A consensus among strangers is more a statistical event than a mob action. They is more often than not a lot of unrelated me's. It's just a matter of perspective and perception. Unique individual is a category of commodified fantasy. Railing against the vast mob is often an act of narcissistic fury than anything else. One is alone in front of a monitor--how dare those members of that mob express ideas or opinions unpleasant to me ! Alone, one can write and click and say the nastiest thing, yelling at the other people alone in their rooms. Nothing so pathetic as some person alone yelling sheep ! sheep ! at a statistical aggregation of other lone persons who happen to hold a different opinion by consensus of default.

Upon review: so no spell check still. Well, Google suffices in that case.
posted by y2karl at 11:42 PM on July 9, 2004


tracy: "recode the site"? It'd take all of thirty seconds, for goodness' sake.

The system lets you remove your email address, thus email addresses are optional. Many people here choose not to display one. If Matt wants to make it a compulsory, the system should require it (this is what he says he might do above). You can't go leaving optional fields in user registrations and then punishing people for not filling them in.

Knowing how these things go, I give this thread about five more posts before someone makes a lame analogy about Matt being the host of a party, or something.
posted by reklaw at 11:44 PM on July 9, 2004


Oh look, y2karl did it while I was writing my post!
posted by reklaw at 11:45 PM on July 9, 2004


Do you gain something in particular by being smug and contrarian, or is it just a character flaw?
posted by mmcg at 11:56 PM on July 9, 2004


It's just that, for some reason, I find I tend to disagree with most of you. At other sites I find myself agreeing with others far more often, and having little to say... but there's just something about mefi. It's like you've all been around for so long, you've got old and set in your ways. There's something very predictable (unique, but predictable) about the way mefites respond to things.

Come to that, I have other stuff to do and it's somewhat predictable how the rest of this thread is going to turn out, so... meh.
posted by reklaw at 12:04 AM on July 10, 2004


I think reklaw is 111. hee!
posted by zarah at 12:08 AM on July 10, 2004


A 111 wannabe perhaps but not a contender in the same weight range.
posted by y2karl at 12:23 AM on July 10, 2004


someone makes a lame analogy about Matt being the host of a party ... Oh look, y2karl did it while I was writing my post!

No, actually, y2k's analogy was missing the "lame" part.
posted by kindall at 1:00 AM on July 10, 2004


I smell an incipient pile-on. Leave him be, please.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:08 AM on July 10, 2004


reklaw - Let's look at your assumptions, shall we?

1. 111 was banned due to not showing an email address - wrong, 111 was banned for the combination of breaking the site's rules and not having an email address so that the site owner could chat privately about the problem with them. They don't even need to add an email address to their account, just email Matt privately to resolve the issue.

2. It's trivial to make a change to the login - you really don't know that. For all we know, the login could be a big old pile of spaghetti code designed to defeat hack attempts (no offense to Matt, as a fellow coder it happens from time to time).

3. Matt should go out of his way to coddle a member who is blatantly breaking the rules - get back to me when you're spending 100 hours a month on this site keeping assholes in line.
posted by TungstenChef at 1:16 AM on July 10, 2004


Pile ons are as much a perceptual artifact as anything else. Four or five people out of a membership of 17,000 are not exactly the equivalent of a mob bent on burning down any Frankenstein's Castle.
posted by y2karl at 1:22 AM on July 10, 2004


What part of incipient was confusing?
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:30 AM on July 10, 2004


The system lets you remove your email address, thus email addresses are optional. Many people here choose not to display one. If Matt wants to make it a compulsory, the system should require it (this is what he says he might do above). You can't go leaving optional fields in user registrations and then punishing people for not filling them in.

you can't force someone to give a valid email address. if they want to feed you a garbage (nonexistent or disposable) address they'll always be able to. which is the same as not having an address but more annoying since you'll have to find out the account's nonexistent after you waste the time to write an email...
posted by juv3nal at 1:49 AM on July 10, 2004


what baffles me is that he was banned for dicking around in precious askme, and not for any of his raging irrational hate spewing in the blue and grey. makes me wonder.

Me too. But then, banning someone for breaking the 'rules' is an easier thing to answer for (if called to do so) than banning them for merely being an asshole, I guess, so I can sympathize.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:09 AM on July 10, 2004


There's a difference between deleting your email address, and not displaying it on your user page.
posted by inpHilltr8r at 2:36 AM on July 10, 2004


what baffles me is that he was banned for dicking around in precious askme, and not for any of his raging irrational hate spewing in the blue and grey. makes me wonder.

It makes perfect sense to me--AskMetaFilter is by design the place where members can be of service to one another and has been, apart from the initial Google it ! fuckwitticisms, fairly free from the rancor and conflict of the blue and grey.

To continue the metaphor began above, it reminds me of a sign I once read--We don't swim in your toilet, please don't pee in our pool.

111 peed in the pool.
posted by y2karl at 3:10 AM on July 10, 2004


What part of incipient was confusing?

Did this make anyone else smile too? I'm a bit brighter than a houseplant but EB still had me reaching for the dictionary
posted by dmt at 3:33 AM on July 10, 2004


111 peed in the pool.

Upon examination of his AskMefi contributions, I most emphatically take that back. Serves me right for spouting off on a matter on which I have not kept track.

I enjoy his colorful banter as much as the next person, but he was beginning to move into Ask MetaFilter in a big way, posting off-topic, entirely help-free comments about "commies" and other such nonsense on questions that had nothing to do with politics.

Upon skimming his comments, I find this comment in Dejah420's bicycle child carrier's post the strongest comment left. The rest seem to be remarkably free of condescension and gennerally full of good advice. On the one rhetorical question--Do you give money to homeless people, panhandlers, and/or beggars?--his answer was I do. It's a religious duty, a moral act and a decent thing to do. You just can't jump to conclusions about anyone here.

Different people rub different people the wrong way differently. 111 didn't bother me that much and he hasn't seemed that prolific a commentator of late to me. Just how many of his comments have you deleted, Matt ?

This is more of a head scratcher the more I look at it.
posted by y2karl at 3:42 AM on July 10, 2004


"I don't think we've lost a user so much as broken a mirror."

I agree.
posted by matteo at 3:59 AM on July 10, 2004


Different people rub different people the wrong way differently.

Your comment explains exactly why he rubbed me the wrong way - A concerned, charitible Christian filled with that much hatred and cynicism? Someone who believes in "morality and decency" ranting on about commies under the bed? A Morrissey fan who appeared cheery in his belief that gays were going to burn in hell? It all just caused a bit of a brain spasm in me, but you can't and shouldn't ban someone for hypocracy. But, as others have said, you can ban someone for consistently breaking the rules.

One positive thing for 111 though - he usually didn't just piss on threads and run, at least he stuck around for the debate.
posted by Jimbob at 4:21 AM on July 10, 2004


keeping assholes in line : I wish I knew Photoshop!

Oh well, at least I have this recourse:

MetaFilter: Keeping assholes in line.
posted by mischief at 6:11 AM on July 10, 2004


Upon examination of his AskMefi contributions, I most emphatically take that back.

His contributions were fairly uniformly outstanding and well-informed, I always thought. I mean, who else would have the class to recommend both Aristotle's Poetics and Tom Wolfe's The Painted Word when discussing art? He knows his goods.
posted by hama7 at 6:12 AM on July 10, 2004


I mean, who else would have the class to recommend both Aristotle's Poetics and Tom Wolfe's The Painted Word when discussing art?

Somebody who went to college for a couple of years. That particular one was OK but not in my top 10 111 AskMefi comments. When he gets specific, he's interesting. His Paris answer, for example.

What answers of his are left on record are not out of line. What I would like to know is what got deleted ?
posted by y2karl at 7:24 AM on July 10, 2004


Chatango could straighten things out in a jiffy.
posted by hama7 at 8:29 AM on July 10, 2004


I thought 111 was a sock puppet account.

Maybe his parent would know.
posted by ook at 10:08 AM on July 10, 2004


111's dad was a glow boy bathroom janitor ?

There's a certain poetic justice to that.
posted by y2karl at 6:00 PM on July 10, 2004


what baffles me is that he was banned for dicking around in precious askme, and not for any of his raging irrational hate spewing in the blue and grey. makes me wonder.

I don't ban people because I disagree with them strongly nor if they're assholish. 111 was very tough to deal with and you could argue that some of his responses to things could have been purposely done to bait everyone, but he was never outright offensive enough to cry foul. Lots of people asked me to ban him ages ago, but then a lot of people wish hama7 wasn't around either and he's turned out to be a great contributor and I'm glad I resisted them all.

I was annoyed at 111 for pissing around in Ask MetaFilter, and I wanted to send him a message about it, and when I couldn't, I did what I did to try and get a response.

What answers of his are left on record are not out of line. What I would like to know is what got deleted ?

Some stupid shit about how everyone was a commie that had nothing to do with a question. It was like the hippy comment on the bike thread, but more off-topic and it was in a few threads.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 6:52 PM on July 10, 2004


It was like the hippy comment on the bike thread, but more off-topic and it was in a few threads.

And, as a result, he comes across as surprisingly modest, helpful and cogent. Sort of a MetaTummyTuck then... a MetaTroll Reduction Surgery, as it were.
posted by y2karl at 7:19 PM on July 10, 2004


"lie"posuction.
posted by quonsar at 8:16 PM on July 10, 2004


i've always thought 111 was Witty.

I wonder what it says about a group if they become convinced that everyone with worldviews different than theirs is the same person.
posted by weston at 11:25 PM on July 10, 2004


Blanking out your email with a "don't contact me" mentality is tantamount to giving the site the finger. Bannination is a fine first resort in such cases.

Agreed. And if we all readily approve banning users like 111 for sloppily inserting political commentary into apolitical discussions, I should assume we also support jettisoning equally shit-stirring & or half-witted partisan users who refuse to provide an email address by which to respond? Not only do they "give MeFi the finger" with tedious one-sided FPP subject matter and by drubbing anyone who doesn't agree, but they give it by not providing an email.

I'm not misunderstanding here, am I--this is the mentality you were referring to?

If not, you may contact me to discuss it privately. My email is posted conveniently in my profile.
posted by dhoyt at 12:22 AM on July 11, 2004


Well, that certainly is a step towards sainthood. All you need now is three certified miracles involving prayers to you and it's Halo City.
posted by y2karl at 1:13 AM on July 11, 2004


I wonder what it says about a group if they become convinced that everyone with worldviews different than theirs is the same person.

well first of all i think Witty has or is a "sock puppet account" because of certain instances where he has responded to his own comments, addressing himself by name, as tho' he forgot to switch accounts. not because i disagree with his opinions. 111 just seems most like him. besides, i've been accused of having a fake account too*, and i'm one of the homo lefty brigade so clearly there isn't a bias against the right wing minority when it comes to mefi's paranoiac witchkayceehunt tendencies 8-)

*my god-child who has lived with me most of her life - we have lots of contact info, but god forbid we post in the same thread or share a similar opinion, doh.

I enjoy his colorful banter as much as the next person
he was never outright offensive enough to cry foul


*boggle*
posted by t r a c y at 2:58 AM on July 11, 2004


I wasn't thinking of Witty. Not even close. For what it's worth.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:00 AM on July 11, 2004


There's a homo lefty brigade?

Does it have a marching band?
posted by snarfodox at 8:05 AM on July 11, 2004




Does it have a marching band?

i can hear "76 trombones" from up here!
posted by quonsar at 8:46 AM on July 11, 2004


Off by seven, q.
posted by trondant at 1:20 PM on July 11, 2004


and those aren't trombones ; >
posted by amberglow at 2:17 PM on July 11, 2004


I was rather taken aback to see how relatively few posts 111 has made. It's interesting scrolling through the Top 100 lists of users. There are people there who have twice as many comments as him or even more whose usernames don't even ring a bell with me.
posted by orange swan at 2:25 PM on July 11, 2004


It's that certain air of ignoblesse oblige which makes him so memorable...
posted by y2karl at 2:49 PM on July 11, 2004


I'd like to point out that when witty briefly made his email account visible, his address was "witty111@[provider].com. So t r a c y may well be onto something.
posted by Mayor Curley at 3:53 PM on July 11, 2004


Your encyclopaedic knowledge of my commenting history never ceases to amaze and disturb me, hama7. Your inability to notice that the second part of the comment you quotes was a joke, well, that does not suprise so much.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:22 PM on July 11, 2004


and those aren't trombones ; >

and we're not marching. Yet. Later.
posted by WolfDaddy at 4:37 PM on July 11, 2004


So t r a c y may well be onto something.

As in both accounts are on dial up from Room 111 at the Bates Motel ?
Witty is his own mom ?
posted by y2karl at 5:03 PM on July 11, 2004


*meep! meep! meep!*
posted by y2karl at 5:04 PM on July 11, 2004


well first of all i think Witty has or is a "sock puppet account" because of certain instances where he has responded to his own comments, addressing himself by name, as tho' he forgot to switch accounts.

Yep
posted by Armitage Shanks at 10:37 AM on July 12, 2004


111's dad was a glow boy bathroom janitor ?

There's a certain poetic justice to that.
posted by y2karl at 6:00 PM PST on July 10


Ha. You guys can mock me and my unfortunate employment history, but please go easy on my poor, departed child.
posted by COBRA! at 1:40 PM on July 12, 2004


I thought 111 was a sock puppet account. I was pretty damn sure of it, in fact.

i've always thought 111 was Witty.


I always thought he was fold_and_mutilate (or perhaps his evil twin Skippy).
posted by timeistight at 1:43 PM on July 12, 2004


Awhile back Witty posted a comment about how he changed his mind on gay marriage and now thinks it should be legal. I can't find it though...

If he really is 111, that's really an amazing accomplishment on the part of pro-gay marriage MeFites.
posted by orange swan at 1:51 PM on July 12, 2004


well first of all i think Witty has or is a "sock puppet account" because of certain instances where he has responded to his own comments, addressing himself by name, as tho' he forgot to switch accounts.

wendell's explanation makes more sense.
posted by weston at 9:57 PM on July 12, 2004


Sorry, always so late to these surreptitious and behind-the-back shit-stirrings....so hard to find, don't you know. Can't imagine why....

And if we all readily approve banning users like 111 for sloppily inserting political commentary into apolitical discussions, I should assume we also support jettisoning equally shit-stirring & or half-witted partisan users who refuse to provide an email address by which to respond?

~heh~

Nah, but many probably do support banning brave souls whose sole idea of dialog is to consistently whine about members sneakily behind their backs, and don't have the balls to contact them directly, right dhoyt? Or maybe we could discuss the banning of Mefites who, lacking the gear for either debate or dialog (and who become so emotional because they feel their silly ideas are constantly being....how did you put it dhoyt.... drubbed), stalk other members and cowardly publish personal information about them, right dhoyt?

My personal telephone number is available here, and has been for years. For some reason, critics like dhoyt and others here can never quite bring themselves to actually initiate any type of personal contact if they have personal issues. Can't imagine why....

And oh, timeistight, what a coincidence! I always thought 111 was you.... only with convictions.

~wink~
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 10:27 PM on July 23, 2004


« Older This is a small thing about which I am a bit...   |   Is anyone planning on attending SENT tomorrow at... Newer »

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