I hate to ask why this was deleted, but... November 22, 2004 6:58 PM   Subscribe

Asking why a post was deleted has become trite and cliched recently, and I am hesitant to do so again so soon. And yet, here is a genuinely light-hearted humor post that's got some brilliant framing done by esch . . . and the deletion reason was 'um?'
posted by Ryvar to Etiquette/Policy at 6:58 PM (193 comments total)

I realize that after the rape haiku debacle I'm not exactly considered an impartial observer on the subject of post deletion, but in my mind this is beginning to cross a line where I'm genuinely concerned with the frequency of low threshold for deletion. I understand that 'get your own site' is the new black, and I'm sure you're a very cool person for suggesting it to me - but I feel that I would be shirking my responsibilities as a user of the site if I didn't state that I believe that the current deletion policy has now gone overboard, and that this post is an example of that fact. While I'm hardly the type to go around starting petitions or anything of that sort, I feel positive that I can't be the only one growing agitated over moderation standards so inconsistent that they feel like bad-faith.

This was a damn funny post, there was no reason for it to die - at the very least we deserve a better explanation than "um?" Or has humor been banned alongside politics and I simply failed to get the memo?
posted by Ryvar at 6:58 PM on November 22, 2004


I feel positive that I can't be the only one growing agitated over moderation standards so inconsistent that they feel like bad-faith.

You're not.
posted by amberglow at 7:01 PM on November 22, 2004


Chickens are people too!
posted by Kwantsar at 7:03 PM on November 22, 2004


ryvar is the goto guy for fried chicken!
posted by quonsar at 7:13 PM on November 22, 2004


This is not fark.
posted by orange clock at 7:15 PM on November 22, 2004


there are many fark links on the front page--why not this one?
posted by amberglow at 7:16 PM on November 22, 2004


This is not fark.

I agree - I hate Fark, personally. Not Fark doesn't mean we ban all humor, though.
posted by Ryvar at 7:16 PM on November 22, 2004


your damn right this is not fark, our fpp was way funnier, bring back the chickens!
posted by Krrrlson at 7:16 PM on November 22, 2004


If "Metafilter" is an organization in which you are a paying customer, press 1.
If "Metafilter" is a sovereign nation of which you are a citizen, press 2.
Otherwise, please hang up and try your call again.
beep.

the post sucked, people. don't get all high and mighty about it. it sucked. donkey balls. goat chunks. it sucked sucked sucked.
posted by PrinceValium at 7:16 PM on November 22, 2004


I'd rather see chicken FPPs than political crap.

I'd like to start reading MeFi a lot more. I gave up on it after the election. It's still political-filter to me. :-(
posted by shepd at 7:18 PM on November 22, 2004


i think the anger and outrage quotient has been steadily dropping since the election, and frankly, i'm worried. can we please ban the images and lighthearted posts and resume the partisan ranting?
posted by keswick at 7:19 PM on November 22, 2004


"This is not fark."


posted by mr_crash_davis at 7:20 PM on November 22, 2004


If "Metafilter" is an organization in which you are a paying customer, press 1.
If "Metafilter" is a sovereign nation of which you are a citizen, press 2.
Otherwise, please hang up and try your call again.


You're completely right, PrinceValium. Because this is a group weblog we should just let one person arbitrarily delete good posts without complaining. That makes perfect sense to me.
posted by Ryvar at 7:21 PM on November 22, 2004


I liked it, but I'm wrong in the head. I agree about the heavy handed moderation, as well, but I've been too busy getting haiku raped in Counterstrike: Source to care all that much.
posted by The God Complex at 7:22 PM on November 22, 2004


If "Metafilter" is an organization in which you are a paying customer, press 1.
If "Metafilter" is a sovereign nation of which you are a citizen, press 2.
Otherwise, please hang up and try your call again.
beep.

the post sucked, people. don't get all high and mighty about it. it sucked. donkey balls. goat chunks. it sucked sucked sucked.


I hope you post that to every person who complains about newsfilter. Ever. Or anything. Hell, there are like fifty-five posts on metatalk today.
posted by The God Complex at 7:23 PM on November 22, 2004


brilliant framing? "10,000 dead in Israel" is neither light hearted nor funny, and the link is a pile of old wank that will die in about ten minutes when that news site updates.

On preview: riiight, Ryvar, yes, let's get a complicated and involved voting or rating system started so that we can all decide what's wank and what isn't, and then, hoo, we'll become a Great Site, right?

You clearly disagree with Mathowie's editing, but that's what he is around here: editor. So get your own community blog or put up with it.
posted by bonaldi at 7:24 PM on November 22, 2004


jeebus, people. In a matter of days, two thousand users will get posting rights to the front page of metafilter. Do you want two thousand one-off links to "weird news" stories? It's going to be a fucking massacre. Everyone needs to get off their goddamn high horses. This place is in transition, and nobody gives a shit about your ego. "Group weblog" doesn't mean that you make other people flush your own turds.
posted by PrinceValium at 7:26 PM on November 22, 2004


Ryvar, yes, let's get a complicated and involved voting or rating system started so that we can all decide what's wank and what isn't, and then, hoo, we'll become a Great Site, right?

I'm sorry, but where exactly did I say that? Ah, nowhere? Good then. Glad to see we're all on the same page.

So get your own community blog or put up with it.

Right, because the correct response to people doing things you disagree with is to 'move away or put up with it.' Tell me, are you a political science major? Do you have a newsletter I could perhaps subscribe to?
posted by Ryvar at 7:28 PM on November 22, 2004


In a matter of days, two thousand users will get posting rights to the front page of metafilter.

Exactly. Matt should be saving his deletion energies for the upcoming tidal wave, rather than stamping out menacing bits of humor threatening to make people laugh.
posted by Ryvar at 7:30 PM on November 22, 2004


You really don't get it, do you.
posted by PrinceValium at 7:31 PM on November 22, 2004


It was a shitty post to frame a bad joke.

(And yes, I've posted many of these. But I've also had many of these deleted and I really didn't give a shit, because I knew it was coming.)

Attention: Matt does not delete things randomly. He has an internal "Eh, I'll leave this post up" threshhold that can not be put into words. As a result of this, Metafilter has become a thriving community, instead of a admin police state.

Attempting to describe or clarify guidelines that are based on his judgement is going to be flawed and open to ridiculous debate. He seems random, but really, there is ALWAYS at least a small reason why a post was deleted. And that reason, should be enough. If it's not, then who really cares.
posted by Stan Chin at 7:37 PM on November 22, 2004


As a n00b, (and an inarticulate one at best) I have to say that I appreciate the example mathowie is making an effort to set here--sure, things have been a bit strict of late (I've been lurking for a couple of years), but with all of us kids raring to get out there, now is the best time for a little "Do as we say, not as we occasionally do" in terms of posting. I think the best message right now is that posts such as this "chicken" one are not the norm here, and that for the most part, when we get our posting rights, we ought to strive for something with a little more substance. I'd be surprised if deletions slack off once everyone has gotten their "filter" legs.
posted by stray at 7:37 PM on November 22, 2004


In a matter of days, two thousand users will get posting rights to the front page of metafilter.

why do say that in the same tone of voice you'd say "In a matter of days, the levee will break and you will all be swept away to your deaths!"?
posted by quonsar at 7:39 PM on November 22, 2004


It was a short, nearly empty news page used to make a cheap joke that preys on a hot button issue. Seemed like a wacky goof, but in the end isn't anything more than the joke.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 7:40 PM on November 22, 2004


Do you want two thousand one-off links to "weird news" stories?

Ummm, yes. I do. I like that side of metafilter. I hate the side of metafilter that is all politics.
posted by shepd at 7:41 PM on November 22, 2004


Matt, if it were in my power, a whole herd of ponies loaded with pancake mix would be headed to your house at this very moment.
posted by konolia at 7:43 PM on November 22, 2004


um.

;)
posted by exlotuseater at 7:45 PM on November 22, 2004


It was a short, nearly empty news page used to make a cheap joke that preys on a hot button issue. Seemed like a wacky goof, but in the end isn't anything more than the joke.

*stamps foot, waves fists, bursts into tears*

BUT MOOOOOM!!!
posted by Krrrlson at 7:46 PM on November 22, 2004


(but really, i was sorry to see the chickens go. chickens are funny.)
posted by Krrrlson at 7:48 PM on November 22, 2004


I meant I'd be surprised if deletions didn't slack off a bit after some time. But either way, *shrug*.
posted by stray at 7:49 PM on November 22, 2004


I'm sorry, but where exactly did I say that? Ah, nowhere? Good then. Glad to see we're all on the same page.

Oh, no, you're right: there are many other alternatives to read into, what was it you said? "Because this is a group weblog we should just let one person arbitrarily delete good posts without complaining."

Go on then, what's your answer other than some sort of group editing control? How do we keep shit off the front page without upsetting you or allowing one person "arbitrary" power?

Right, because the correct response to people doing things you disagree with is to 'move away or put up with it.'

Well, in a situation where you're completely powerless, it's one of the best. And, oh how this makes me glad, you are completely powerless here, and you can't do fuck-all about the things you don't like apart from vent on another section of the same site you have no control over. Sure, if you got almost everyone behind you something might happen, but since that groundswell of support isn't exactly forthcoming, you're SOL.

Perhaps you should launch a newsletter, complaining about the terrible heavy-handedness of Matt's editing? You could even launch a site for it, where you daily log all the nasty things he does that you disagree with. Call it a web log. Your own.
posted by bonaldi at 7:49 PM on November 22, 2004


God damn it.

Now I can't make my 10,000-piece bucket of cocks joke.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 7:49 PM on November 22, 2004


Oh, no, you're right: there are many other alternatives to read into, what was it you said? "Because this is a group weblog we should just let one person arbitrarily delete good posts without complaining."

Go on then, what's your answer other than some sort of group editing control? How do we keep shit off the front page without upsetting you or allowing one person "arbitrary" power?


My point is that we are supposed to complain so that one person can know that others disagree with his decisions - and these complaints can be noted and thus influence future decisions. This same kind of thinking is the logic at work behind most western nations allowing their populace to protest, etc.

Well, in a situation where you're completely powerless, it's one of the best. And, oh how this makes me glad, you are completely powerless here, and you can't do fuck-all about the things you don't like apart from vent on another section of the same site you have no control over.

It's good to know that you feel your personal maturity is best expressed through gloating over others. I would hope that even you would not be so blind as to suggest that it is possible to take actions in our universe which have no effect - and it is by that small margin that I seek to influence the site. I believe the deletions have gotten out of hand, and will continue to object to the more egregious examples of what I believe constitutes misuse of power. To do otherwise would be deeply intellectually dishonest, and were I to take your philosophy of 'leave and rebuild' to it's natural conclusion, the web would quickly begin to resemble a link-free blogging site - thousands of individuals posting their thoughts and receiving no comments and not linking to one another out of spite. I hope this is not your ideal model for how the web should function - it certainly isn't mine.

One of the things adults do is interact and learn to deal with other entities that have different goals than themselves. This entails, at least in part, attempting to influence these other entities. I would hope, despite the level of insight your ideology seems to lack, that you would agree with me on this at least.
posted by Ryvar at 8:05 PM on November 22, 2004


It was a short, nearly empty news page used to make a cheap joke that preys on a hot button issue. Seemed like a wacky goof, but in the end isn't anything more than the joke.

While I still disagree your decision - in light of some of the Friday Flash crap that passes muster - that's certainly a better explanation than 'um.' Thanks, I appreciate it.
posted by Ryvar at 8:08 PM on November 22, 2004


so, bonaldi is ruining the intarweb?
posted by quonsar at 8:12 PM on November 22, 2004


It's good to know that you feel your personal maturity is best expressed through gloating over others.

I'm sorry, but where exactly did I say that? Ah, nowhere? Good then. My personal maturity is not expressed via gloating over you, my oh-so-adult voice-of-the-underground, just my relief that Matt gets to edit and you don't. Not a gloat, just that I think I know which site I'd prefer.

And, yes, it's great that you work so hard on your entity influence, but now two thirds of your meta threads are about Matt's deletions. I think MeTa will live with you having to be intellectually dishonest.
posted by bonaldi at 8:19 PM on November 22, 2004


I have yet to disagree with #1 on any of his deletions. The man is a genius. Let him be.

The check is in the mail, I assume?
posted by graventy at 8:20 PM on November 22, 2004


Has a post ever reappeared after a deletion?
posted by interrobang at 8:21 PM on November 22, 2004


gloat
intr.v. gloat·ed, gloat·ing, gloats

To feel or express great, often malicious, pleasure or self-satisfaction: Don't gloat over your rival's misfortune.

And, oh how this makes me glad, you are completely powerless here, and you can't do fuck-all about the things you don't like apart from vent on another section of the same site you have no control over.

Not a gloat, just that I think I know which site I'd prefer.

Bonaldi that sentence fits the definition of gloating perfectly - you explicitly admit to taking joy in another's weakness. I am sorry that you are so deeply at odds with reality, and send my sincere wishes that you and it will mend your differences in the near future.
posted by Ryvar at 8:28 PM on November 22, 2004


I hate to complain but this touches on perhaps my biggest issue with MetaFilter as it stands: posts are deleted on the basis of what is deemed stupid -- a number of nice little curiosity posts are removed (sometimes, stupid *is* the point) and any number of gobshite flash games and redundant news links remain.

For me, the "that's actually out there?" factor of some of these posts, highlighting the curiosity shop aspect of the internet, is far closer to the "best of the web" than many many of the other posts.

I beg clemency.
posted by nthdegx at 8:37 PM on November 22, 2004


Some of us enjoy the randomness of it all.

It's like life.
posted by konolia at 8:41 PM on November 22, 2004


konolia you realize that your statement works for both sides (some enjoy the randomness of the odd joke posts / some enjoy the randomness of the deletions), don't you?
posted by Ryvar at 8:44 PM on November 22, 2004


DO NOT STRESS THE KONOLIA. SHE CANNOT AFFORD THE MEDS.
posted by quonsar at 8:54 PM on November 22, 2004


Imagine a world without metatalk. It's easy if you try.

Oh, nevermind.
posted by justgary at 9:07 PM on November 22, 2004


Quonsar Quonsar Quonsar
posted by konolia at 9:07 PM on November 22, 2004


Now I can't make my 10,000-piece bucket of cocks joke.

Actually XQUZYPHYR, it is doubtful all 10,000 of those chickens were cocks. It is far more likely that the majority were hens.
posted by Krrrlson at 9:19 PM on November 22, 2004


Writing his name three times in a row is liable to overstimulate Q, konolia.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:20 PM on November 22, 2004


No, worse, it'll summon him. Better say it three times backwards before he's impregnated your garbage can and dragged your dog across the lawn. Hurry!
posted by trondant at 9:22 PM on November 22, 2004


She was trying to unsummon him.
posted by Krrrlson at 9:22 PM on November 22, 2004


quonsar - bad taste.

( even if that is your forte )


meanwhile......"MinutiaFilter!" : fascinating trivia for the masses !
posted by troutfishing at 9:24 PM on November 22, 2004


blast! you beat me to it.
posted by Krrrlson at 9:25 PM on November 22, 2004


Ryvar, at some point you should just shut up, because even if you had a point, no one cares because you're coming off like a whiny fuck. You reached that after hitting post on the original complaint. Give it a rest already.
posted by FunkyHelix at 9:26 PM on November 22, 2004


IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, YOU'RE NOT COOL
posted by bob sarabia at 9:27 PM on November 22, 2004


I always thought the "summoning quonsar" chant never worked when you captalized the Q.

However, when I did read it, three Quiznos sandwiches appeared on my laptop.

And let's face it, NONE OF US CAN AFFORD THE MEDS.
posted by wendell at 9:37 PM on November 22, 2004


Actually, I'd like to stress that I don't think this was a good post, and it did deserve deleting. My whole basis for my theory is that I had one such post deleted, didn't understand the reasoning, didn't have a reply to my email and so remained somewhat in the dark. I have no basis to think that this happens a lot, however, so I'll shut up. I will reduce my point to the following: plain, descriptive reasons for deletion are very useful to the poster, if less funny to everyone else.
posted by nthdegx at 9:39 PM on November 22, 2004


Chickens are funny. And yet, absolutely delicious. Therein lies the paradox...
posted by LarryC at 9:40 PM on November 22, 2004


Can I get my $5 back? The comments here aren't much more clever or insightful than the ones over at FARK. At least you folks can spell Chile/Chilean though.
posted by lazymonster at 9:35 AM PST on November 22


What's up with the FARK comparisons all over the place?

(And what's up with joining a website to piss on it?)

[And why do I get that funny feeling down there when I catch a rerun of Golden Girls and it's all at night and stuff and they're drinking tea or whatever around the kitchen table and Bea Arthur is wearing a bathrobe?]
posted by _sirmissalot_ at 9:45 PM on November 22, 2004


This was a damn funny post

As a staunch, outspoken opponent of Israel and everything it stands for, I must tell you, Ryvar, you are sick. The outside world must be little more than television programming to you if you really think this is in good humor. Perhaps, between friends who enjoy dark humor, I could see a crack like this flying for a drunken moment or two. But if Matt thought this one stank too much for the MetaFilter homepage, he had plenty of ground to stand on. Nice Larry Flynt impersonation, but please find something worth defending.

Sometimes I think people's skins are too thick around here.
posted by scarabic at 9:55 PM on November 22, 2004


I don't think it was a sick joke, but I think it was a stupid one. It was a dumb one-liner, it wasn't a post. It's the Henny Youngman of FPPs.

_sirmissalot_, isn't that something that would be best addressed anonymously in AskMe?
posted by Arch Stanton at 10:10 PM on November 22, 2004


I haven't disagreed with any of Matt's recent deletions. And it's a mystery to me why anyone would wail about losing this post. Are people going to second-guess Matt every time, fer cryin' out loud?
posted by pmurray63 at 10:24 PM on November 22, 2004


pmurray63, Yes. People will second-guess Matt every time he deletes a post. This is metafilter rule #49: bitch and moan as much as you can about how Matt runs the site. It makes you feel important to get an email from Matt or a response from mathowie in your post (not to be mistaken with mathovvie).
posted by Arch Stanton at 10:29 PM on November 22, 2004


Seriously. The guy has an amazing track record. When in disagreement, pause and reflect. You probably have something to learn. God knows... there was once a time I emailed Matt demanding to know why he was discouraging Iraq war posts. The Most Important Issue of Our Time!

He never replied. But I eventually got it.
posted by scarabic at 10:35 PM on November 22, 2004


Everything is coming undone.

Run.
posted by orange clock at 10:36 PM on November 22, 2004


That was so erotic, scarabic. No wonder you were such a rabid anti-newsfilter type, being a new convert and all. You probably still had a pricetag on your bible ;)
posted by The God Complex at 11:03 PM on November 22, 2004


Seriously. The guy has an amazing track record. When in disagreement, pause and reflect. You probably have something to learn


posted by Krrrlson at 11:13 PM on November 22, 2004


My point is that we are supposed to complain so that one person can know that others disagree with his decisions - and these complaints can be noted and thus influence future decisions. This same kind of thinking is the logic at work behind most western nations allowing their populace to protest, etc.

I must tell you that I have been quite depressed as of late, and this slice of inadvertant absurdity perked me right up. I'm tickled by the equation that lodging a complaint over a deleted humor post on a website is on equal footing with, say, the struggle for universal suffrage. I've been giggling steadily for five, maybe six full minutes now, and I genuinely feel much better. Cheers!
posted by scody at 11:58 PM on November 22, 2004


News of the Weird is lame.
posted by Space Coyote at 1:35 AM on November 23, 2004


Ryvar, please stop stirring the shit. It's been whipped enough already. Thank you.
posted by loquacious at 2:05 AM on November 23, 2004


I derive a sick sort of satisfaction from reading these deletion threads.

It's like watching a little kid turn his face skyward and say, "Why, God? Why did you kill my kitten, my favorite kitten in the world, whose name was Sir Edward Kittypaws?"

And God says, "Because he was a COCKSUCKAH! HAW HAW!"

Then all the angels peek over the clouds and point and laugh at the child, and he weeps bitterly, only to buy another kitten.

And stick that kitten in the middle of traffic.

Rinse and repeat.

It's beautiful, guys. Don't ever change.

*Note: Do not take this to mean I find the wanton destruction of kitties amusing in any way. I love almost all animals, especially kittens.
posted by fricative at 3:07 AM on November 23, 2004


What's all this about chickens?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:35 AM on November 23, 2004


Nothing.

Go run around in circles in the backyard some more.
posted by troutfishing at 4:08 AM on November 23, 2004


what fricative said
posted by matteo at 4:20 AM on November 23, 2004


MetaFilter: All the angels peek over the clouds and point and laugh
posted by heatherann at 7:12 AM on November 23, 2004


Given the kind of headlines that often come out of Israel, and the general tenor of the news lately - and speaking as one with a strong emotional connection to Israel - I found this post offensive. Sure, it was also a bit lacking by "best of the web" standards, but to me the bigger problem is that it's in bad taste.

Just chiming in... my first post!
posted by fingers_of_fire at 7:44 AM on November 23, 2004


"Why, God? Why did you kill my kitten, my favorite kitten in the world, whose name was Sir Edward Kittypaws?"
him name is hopkin green frog

i'll find my frog
who took my frog

*glares at Matt*
posted by Ryvar at 7:48 AM on November 23, 2004


I laughed. But I didn't feel good about laughing.

I get that people want to express their impatience/disapproval about deleted posts on MeTa. That's one of the purposes of MeTa. But I wonder why it always has to turn into such a melodrama.
posted by Sidhedevil at 7:55 AM on November 23, 2004


PUT IN A MEMO SHORTCAKE....MAHRAAAAA
posted by clavdivs at 8:02 AM on November 23, 2004


The cold dread that hits you, a silent curse to Google News that failed you, the seconds that feel like hours as you wait for the page to load - and then, the confusion, the shock, the smile that cracks your face, the urge to strangle the poster.. all good fun, really.

"10,000 dead in Israel" is neither light hearted nor funny
- bonaldi
Indeed bonaldi, 10,000 humans dead anywhere would be a tragedy but would this Meta thread exist if the incident happened in say, Poland? 10, 000 dead in Poland! When will the carnage end?

As a staunch, outspoken opponent of Israel and everything it stands for, I must tell you, Ryvar, you are sick.
- scarabic
Scarabic hits the nail on it's head: for opponents of Israel, this thread and other humorous takes on Israel's woes must stop. Because there is really only one way to make everyone a staunch, outspoken supporter of Israel and everything it stands for: daring humour.
It's time to stop tip-toeing around jewish issues, time to stop being politically correct when it comes to Israel, let Israel fly, crash and pick itself up, time to stop making Israel a sacrosanct exception; because such ideas/words/actions breed violent resentment in those who is not jewish or israeli. I'm dead serious.
Was a bit anti-Zionist until I met, in Krakow, a jewish man from Jerusalem with whom, for the very first time, we laughed at jokes that would brand us as anti-semetic on this site. We laughed, we toasted, he invited me for Szabat, and here I am, a staunch, outspoken supporter of Israel. Hmm..

To get back to the issue ryvar raised in his initial post: yes, please add more descriptive reasons for any deletion, especially if you don't answer emails and even if, as nthdegx said, it's less funny to everyone else. Thank you.
/me eats the memo.
posted by ruelle at 8:12 AM on November 23, 2004


I wonder why it always has to turn into such a melodrama.

Because this is... The Days of Our Filter! Come on, MeTa wouldn't be MeTa without the whining and the laughing and the pointing and the crying and the snot running down and people lying down and waving their legs in the air... It doesn't get any better than this! I started out being annoyed at Ryvar and now I'm grateful for the entertainment he's unwittingly provided and my mood is much improved. Thank you, MetaFilter!

Also, and I never thought I'd say this, Stan Chin is a very wise man.

Oh, and I love you newbies to death, you're sweet and wonderful and are making things better, but could you please stop saying things like "this is my first post"? We don't do that here. Thank you.
posted by languagehat at 8:13 AM on November 23, 2004


But I wonder why it always has to turn into such a melodrama.

Because that's one of the other purposes of MeTa? Face it, people love to display the righteous anger and to mix it up with each other. We loves the drama.

I agree with f_o_f, and no. 1 -- the post, as written up, was in bad taste. Not bad enough taste to warrant all this hand wringing and whinging, but bad enough taste to baleet.
posted by papercake at 8:13 AM on November 23, 2004


We've discussed the taste of the post enough to realize that we aren't going to have a consensus, so let's move on to a more constructive point that has been brought up:

Would it be fair to say that we believe that reasons for deletion should be more detailed?
posted by Bugbread at 8:26 AM on November 23, 2004


We used to not have reasons for deletion at all.
In the snow. Uphill. Both ways.
posted by PrinceValium at 8:33 AM on November 23, 2004


With no shoes.

*shakes cane at ungrateful whippersnappers*

(I agree with bugbread. More detailed explanation = less metatalk posts)
posted by iconomy at 8:36 AM on November 23, 2004


Would it be fair to say that we believe that reasons for deletion should be more detailed?

No. Matt doesn't have to explain at all, and if he's willing to take the trouble to do so, let him do it in whatever manner amuses him and makes the expenditure of energy worthwhile to him. As has been said, it's usually obvious to anyone who's been reading MeFi for a while why a post has been deleted anyway; it's just the aggrieved poster who needs a clue.
posted by languagehat at 8:37 AM on November 23, 2004


Would it be fair to say that we believe that reasons for deletion should be more detailed?

No, it wouldn't. "Um" was plenty for me.
posted by timeistight at 8:42 AM on November 23, 2004


Matt is NOT a slave of this site.

He who expends the bandwitdth makes the rules.
posted by konolia at 8:47 AM on November 23, 2004


Languagehat: If the deletion reason isn't for the aggrieved poster, who is it for? Matt doesn't seem like a super snarky guy (direct, but not snarky), so I doubt he put the feature in just to get a few barbs in...

Rephrased, then, and setting aside the load on matt for later discussion:

Would we prefer the reasons for deletion to be more explicit in order that "Why Have I Been Deleted" discussions are decreased, or at least made more directed, or would we prefer the reasons for deletion to be as stand, resulting in either more, or less directed, grey posts?
posted by Bugbread at 8:47 AM on November 23, 2004


Konolia:

Yes, I realize that, and if matt says "I'm not going to post more detailed explanations", I'll shut my mouth and keep my grumbling inside my throat and away from my keyboard. However, as far as I know, he hasn't said that it's out of the question, so for now I was hoping we could discuss if it was even a good idea in general, and, if there were any consensus whatsoever, we could offer the idea to matthowie to adopt or shoot down as he sees fit. And then, what he says, goes.

It's a potential feature suggestion, not a feature demand.
posted by Bugbread at 8:52 AM on November 23, 2004


Rephrased, then, and setting aside the load on matt for later discussion:

Would we prefer the reasons for deletion to be more explicit in order that "Why Have I Been Deleted" discussions are decreased, or at least made more directed, or would we prefer the reasons for deletion to be as stand, resulting in either more, or less directed, grey posts?


"We" would prefer that the reasons for deletion to be as stand. "We" would also prefer that Matt delete any MetaTalk posts whining about deletions. In fact, "we" think matt should just randomly delete stuff to stay in practice.
posted by timeistight at 9:07 AM on November 23, 2004


More detailed explanations would just give y'all more to whine about. There is nothing Matt can say when he deletes a thread that will keep someone from being upset about it.
posted by anapestic at 9:16 AM on November 23, 2004


Current exit polls (my vote not included)

More detail: 1
Same as now: 4
Less detail: 0
posted by Bugbread at 9:35 AM on November 23, 2004


Konolia, if you don't like to see discussion about posts, why don't you go get an account over at Memepool?

If we followed your logic, allowing those who paid for bandwidth to set the rules, then matt would have been ousted by a n00b Coup d'Etat last week.
posted by b1tr0t at 9:40 AM on November 23, 2004


No, no, the n00b coup d'emat does not begin until next week. But keep it under your hat. That kind of thing is so much more fun if it's a surprise.
posted by naomi at 9:48 AM on November 23, 2004


Bugbread: My vote on this would be pretty obvious. That's one more in favor of more detail.
posted by Ryvar at 9:48 AM on November 23, 2004


I'd like to switch my vote to "Less detail". I'd like to see what matt can do with single-character explanations.
posted by timeistight at 9:59 AM on November 23, 2004


DO NOT DISTURB THE KONOLIA
posted by quonsar at 10:17 AM on November 23, 2004


Current exit polls (my vote included)

More detail: 2
Same as now: 3
Less detail: 1
posted by Bugbread at 10:18 AM on November 23, 2004


I vote for just a standard "Neener, neener" for each deletion. If people want to feel persecuted, give them an actual reason like a vague confirmation that they suck.

And if Matt really wants to make money, instead of charging $5 to get in here, he should charge a dollar for the right to start stupid deletion threads. He could then buy a stable of ponies to carry his vibrating pancakes.
posted by FunkyHelix at 10:30 AM on November 23, 2004



Matt is NOT a slave of this site.

He who expends the bandwitdth makes the rules.


The new users paid for it. They make the rules?

PS - you have some of matt's ass juice on your (stan) chin. Be more careful next time you're up there ;)

Cheers.
posted by The God Complex at 10:56 AM on November 23, 2004



Matt is NOT a slave of this site.

He who expends the bandwitdth makes the rules.


The new users paid for it. They make the rules? They expended the cash to expend the server upgrades to expend our skullduggery.

PS - you have some of matt's ass juice on your (stan) chin. Be more careful next time you're up there ;)

Cheers.
posted by The God Complex at 10:56 AM on November 23, 2004


Dammit. It said it timed out. You lied to me, metatalk: you lied!
posted by The God Complex at 10:57 AM on November 23, 2004


Can we give Matt $5 to delete people? Because a) there are some noobs I'm already hating, and b) it would be fun.
posted by Sidhedevil at 11:03 AM on November 23, 2004


TGC, see what happens when you talk about Matt's ass juice?

(Need I remind you that you're not really God, despite what your neuroses may indicate?)
posted by chicobangs at 11:03 AM on November 23, 2004


I vote for soupçon more detail, a pinch extra sarcasm, and a whine-free Meta. IOW, no posts on deletions to stand. The Matthammer must be swift, just and unquestioned.
posted by dash_slot- at 11:05 AM on November 23, 2004


I vote for whatever reasons-for-deletion most thoroughly upset Mr. "I have such a terrific sense of humor" Ryvar.

In fact, I'd love to see a completely unrelated post with the reason given as: "Fuck Ryvar."

(Not that I'm saying "fuck Ryvar," of course. I would never say such a thing. This is only a hypothetical.)
posted by soyjoy at 11:06 AM on November 23, 2004



(Need I remind you that you're not really God, despite what your neuroses may indicate?)


No, Matt is, according to all the twats in this thread =)
posted by The God Complex at 11:18 AM on November 23, 2004


More detail: 2
Same as now: 3
Less detail: 1


don't forget "not caring enough about this to even say a goddamn thing": ~18,469.

since it doesn't get said enough, I'll just point out that this is not a democracy, it is a sandbox owned and operated by You Know Who.
posted by norm at 11:19 AM on November 23, 2004


Now, see, I don't get the "Matt's not the boss of us!" attitude.

Because the fact is that Matt, although not the boss of us, is the editor of us. Full stop.

Given that this is, as norm says, his sandbox, all this "Fight tha PowER!" nonsense is just ludicrous.
posted by Sidhedevil at 11:21 AM on November 23, 2004


A deleted FPP is as the death of one fish in the sea. How beautiful and dear such FPP to its parent, how empty and cold the waters in its absence, and yet the universe pays no mind, and demands no explanation. If our Creator would see fit to throw a crumb of reason to the grieving parent, to pay tribute to the existence of the missing fish, be grateful, parent, for that crumb, even as the universe laughs at the pitiful scant offering, forgetting in its amusement even the fact of the fish.

...This is from the Bible, it's right after the part about gays go to hell.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 11:22 AM on November 23, 2004


timeistight, we agree! Because the site is well-curated, it's managed to draw my limited, divided, wine-dark, know-it-all-broad attention several times a day for a few years. That's major -- only my barking dog or whining teenagers do as well (and not so much). He's got the knack, it's corralled quite a crowd thus far, I'm happy to submit to it.
posted by thinkpiece at 11:22 AM on November 23, 2004


More detail: 2
Same as now: 3
Less detail: 1
Every deletion followed by 'Fark Random Meta User': 1

posted by haqspan at 11:25 AM on November 23, 2004


I would not read it if you dared me
Your dead Israelis badly scared me
I would not read about your chickens
I can't imagine slimmer pickings
I would not read it, you big phoney
I would not read it on my pony
I would not read it, I would not
I would not read it on the pot
I wouldn't lend it half my ear
And so I made it disappear

All deletion notices in rhyme!

...or what dash_slot said.
posted by terpsichoria at 11:27 AM on November 23, 2004



Now, see, I don't get the "Matt's not the boss of us!" attitude.

Because the fact is that Matt, although not the boss of us, is the editor of us. Full stop.

Given that this is, as norm says, his sandbox, all this "Fight tha PowER!" nonsense is just ludicrous.


I agree. But people are overly vociferous in defending to the death is every action, from the "it's his sandbox!" argument that gets trotted out everytime someone that doesn't agree with Matt questions policy to the 'MATT ROX0RZ HERE'S SOME PONIES ROFL COPTER' stuff.

However, most of the people here, myself included, are douche bags, so singling out the more sycophantic douche bags was probably unnecessary ;P
posted by The God Complex at 11:34 AM on November 23, 2004


God, I love the term "ass juice." It's so... wrong.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 11:37 AM on November 23, 2004


I think some members have more Metatalk posts than Metafilter ones.

I wonder what that says about society, as a whole.

I also recommend each and every one of you go and eat some ice cream. Then come back here and realize there are more important things to do. Like finding quirky links to amuse me until I'm allowed to post to the blue.

P.S. LOLOCAUST
P.P.S. LMAORGASM
P.P.S.P.S. LOLAPALOOZA
posted by Kleptophoria! at 11:48 AM on November 23, 2004


*proffers loves to stupidsexyFlanders*

*offers Kleenex to konolia*

*doffs hat to TheGodComplex*
posted by dash_slot- at 11:53 AM on November 23, 2004


I vote for Matt to delete all MeTa posts about why a post has been deleted.

Psst, quonsar: if you press the caps lock button a second time, it goes back to lowercase.
posted by me3dia at 11:59 AM on November 23, 2004


light-hearted humor post
Only because per your titling of the post, it was animals not humans.
posted by thomcatspike at 12:08 PM on November 23, 2004


And if Matt really wants to make money, instead of charging $5 to get in here, he should charge a dollar for the right to start stupid deletion threads.

That would be so frickin' awesome, baby Jesus! And the charges should be retroactive, with coming-economic-Armageddon levels of fucking interest. Because Jesus W. Christ, this "why was my post deleted? Why does gravity suck?" MetaWhine trend is enough to make a girl long for the good ol' days of pointless call-outs and threads devolving into sexual innuendo. /me grabs Sidhedevil and kisses her, just for the sake of distraction.
posted by scody at 12:12 PM on November 23, 2004


What is so ironic is that my accidental double post from early this morning is still on the front page and has over twenty comments.
posted by konolia at 12:15 PM on November 23, 2004


Why does gravity suck?

Gravity's got me down.
posted by Krrrlson at 12:16 PM on November 23, 2004


I think some members have more Metatalk posts than Metafilter ones.

I wonder what that says about society, as a whole.


Very little?
posted by DrJohnEvans at 12:33 PM on November 23, 2004


What is so ironic is that my accidental double post from early this morning is still on the front page and has over twenty comments.

…and when it's deleted we'll have a 175-comment thread about it.
posted by timeistight at 12:39 PM on November 23, 2004


What Matt said. Potentially upsetting stupid joke.
posted by xammerboy at 1:06 PM on November 23, 2004


Before you ask for more detail on deletions, keep in mind that it's likely to be:

Um, because it's pointless, not funny enough, likely to generate flamewars, and generally inadequate.

There is no Metafilter Constitution or Supreme Court to debate the finer points of whether or not your post was really pointless, or merely merely pointless. There is no case law to cite, and there are no amicus briefs.

That said, these MeTawhinges are quite entertaining, so carry on.

Crash, loved the Fark tag.
posted by theora55 at 1:14 PM on November 23, 2004


I feel dirty for thinking it was funny...
posted by dness2 at 1:18 PM on November 23, 2004


As a staunch, outspoken opponent of Israel and everything it stands for, I must tell you, Ryvar, you are sick.
- scarabic
Scarabic hits the nail on it's head: for opponents of Israel, this thread and other humorous takes on Israel's woes must stop. Because there is really only one way to make everyone a staunch, outspoken supporter of Israel and everything it stands for: daring humour.


What? I'm barely following you, but all I meant was the following:

I'm not saying this out of any kind of pro-Israel sympathy or reactionary political correctness, but, rather, on a basic human level: this isn't very funny. I also said I could imagine two friends cackling about shit like this over drinks, which you have apparently done. Congrats. That is the venue for this kind of humor. Not the front page of MeFi. At least, that's what I would take this deletion to suggest. Carry on.
posted by scarabic at 1:35 PM on November 23, 2004


Ryvar, you are sick. The outside world must be little more than television programming to you if you really think this is in good humor.: Scarabic emulates exactly how i feel.

It wasn't clever, it wasn't witty, and it wasn’t bright. It was the basest manifestation of adolescent humor. I didn't laugh - I simply rolled my eyes. I’m actually embarrassed for you, ryvar, for admitting that you don't understand why this post should have been deleted. Ryvar, there are more constructive ways to spend your time rather than whining every time a thread gets deleted. Go have a nice long wank please.
posted by naxosaxur at 1:42 PM on November 23, 2004


Um, because it's pointless, not funny enough, likely to generate flamewars, and generally inadequate.

Wanna take a walk down the front page and see how many other posts could fit into those categories?

The topic of the thread here is "um.", not the merit of the post. I think I deserve a little more.
posted by esch at 1:51 PM on November 23, 2004


Current exit polls

More detail: 3
Same as now: 3
Less detail: 1
Neener Neener: 1
Whatever pisses of Ryvar: 1
Every deletion followed by 'Fark Random Meta User': 1
In rhyme: 1
Absent from vote: 18985

Divided into general categories:

More detail: 3
Anything other than more detail: 8

So it looks like the "nays" have it, and the petition for additional detail provision will not be submitted to the chairman for consideration.
posted by Bugbread at 1:55 PM on November 23, 2004


For the record, bugbread, I'd like to point out (before it gets deleted) that the "Whatever pisses off Ryvar" vote was issued by an unsecured voting machine that leaves no physical record - a paper trail, if you will - of the vote. I therefore move to have this vote stricken from the record.
posted by Ryvar at 2:00 PM on November 23, 2004


I'm sorry, sir, but all complaints with the voting process handled by Bugbread Technologies are in violation of the DMCA (Don't Mention Counting Accuracy) act, and cannot be processed. However, rest assured that the Piss Off Ryvar candidate, being a third party candidate with only minor funding, will not be winning, especially as I have received no money under the table from its supporters.
posted by Bugbread at 2:08 PM on November 23, 2004


Geez, I love how all this rolls out of control so quickly. I'd already forgotten about that post when this one was posted. I was, however, disapointed when the post got the clip. I wanted to tell my funny joke and just as I commented the thread went POOF!

I was going to comment:

"It was clearly a coup attempt"
posted by elwoodwiles at 2:09 PM on November 23, 2004


esch: Okay, you got it: It was completely personal. Mathowie hates you! HATES YOU!!! Out of 20K people on this website, he keeps his eye completely attuned to every single action you take. He's ready to pounce the minute you fuck up. You are the great metafilter celebrity, and no one else can be held to your precedent. Every time you log on to metafilter, a little alarm in Mathowie's server room goes off, and he keeps his great cyclops eye on you. He is watching...waiting for the tiniest aberration, so he can punish you with his mighty fist. Is that what you want to hear? Does that make it all better? Does that give you closure?
posted by naxosaxur at 2:14 PM on November 23, 2004


The last line was completely sarcastic, I'm sorry you missed that.

The deleted thread policy is crap, however. Offering no reason is better than "um."
posted by esch at 2:23 PM on November 23, 2004


DrJohnEvans: Are you new?

MEANWHILE IN METATALK--

Another thread becomes utter gibberish. This stuff is sometimes more entertaining than Metafilter-proper. It's like a cult of personality orgy.
posted by Kleptophoria! at 2:30 PM on November 23, 2004


Registrar: DOTSTER, INC.
Whois-Server:whois.dotster.com
Domain Name: METAFILTER.COM
Created on: 18-MAR-99
Expires on: 18-MAR-09
Last Updated on: 11-NOV-04

Administrative, Technical Contact:
Haughey, Mathew mathowie@stuffyoucouldlookupyourself.com
End of Whois Information

It looks pretty cut and dry to me.

You've got another 4.5 years to practice your deletion skills before your hostile takeover.

I'd suggest studying now.
posted by icey at 2:32 PM on November 23, 2004


om
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 2:33 PM on November 23, 2004


For the record, bugbread, I'd like to point out (before it gets deleted) that the "Whatever pisses off Ryvar" vote was issued by an unsecured voting machine that leaves no physical record - a paper trail, if you will - of the vote. I therefore move to have this vote stricken from the record.

To the troutmobile!
posted by Krrrlson at 2:46 PM on November 23, 2004


i'd like to register one vote against the new members. they're all engorged cocks.
posted by The God Complex at 2:50 PM on November 23, 2004


You're going to have to phrase that in terms of "What should be done regarding deletion explanations" for it to enter the poll.
posted by Bugbread at 2:53 PM on November 23, 2004


Are we actually voting? Can I vote for both "less detail" and "whatever pisses Ryvar off?" No? OK, I'm voting for "Ryvar, STFU already, please".

"...and I am hesitant to do so..." Bullshit. I've met freshly polished plate glass windows that were more opaque than you, Ryvar. Next time, please hesitate until you refrain from posting and continue to refrain from posting.

I've said this before (And in a nearly identical thread, posted by Ryvar): I believe that the majority of MeFi users would be all over Matt like shit on a shithawk the instant he actually pulled any "unfair" or "despotic" type assgrabbery, however unlikely.

There isn't any kind of cultish "dear leader" crap going on here, except that mild respect which Matt rightfully earned. Now take your canary and scat. There isn't even a coal mine here.
posted by loquacious at 2:57 PM on November 23, 2004


I protest the deletion of engorged members.
posted by taz at 2:58 PM on November 23, 2004


Seriously, I disagree with TGC's condemnation of the newbies. I think they're great. In general, it makes sense to think that newbies should be lower profile etc etc; but MeFi is different. A whole bunch of these 2K new members have been lurking for probably longer than a bunch of posting members. They've been watching the whinging and drama from the old members for years now, and they're making their voices heard. Good for them. I see very few people (but there are a few) that are obviously completely new to MeFi and don't have a clue as to what it's all about. Most seem as familiar with the way things work and personalities here as any 14Kers, at least.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 3:12 PM on November 23, 2004


*buys stuffyoucouldlookupyourself.com*
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:12 PM on November 23, 2004


"Um" was pithy and concise. Following it with the full stop was gilding the lilly.

I'd be honoured to have a thread of mine deleted with a two character explanation. I'd like to see a separate RSS feed for two-character deletion explanations so i can collect them all. I'm looking forward to "ew, no, FU, ik, er and !?"
posted by timeistight at 3:16 PM on November 23, 2004


But I wonder why it always has to turn into such a melodrama.

Because people are lonely and feel sad.
posted by rushmc at 3:16 PM on November 23, 2004


There is no Metafilter Constitution...
posted by theora55 at 1:14 PM PST on November 23

Now that would a cool ide-
OW! STOP THROWING STONES GODDAMIT!
posted by comraderaoul at 4:02 PM on November 23, 2004


DrJohnEvans: Are you new?

No, but even if I was, I wouldn't expect to find much from conclusions drawn for "society as a whole", based on observations from MeFi and MeTa. Also, you now have more MetaTalk posts than MetaFilter ones—so you can draw your own conclusions now, whatever you were trying to theorize. I wasn't entirely sure.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 4:06 PM on November 23, 2004


*looks down pants finds no engorged cock*

hmm time to update my user page:

WF seeks to have a engorged cock transplant please paypal $10 to lackscock@paypal.com so I can retify the situation :)
posted by squeak at 5:17 PM on November 23, 2004


Seriously, I disagree with TGC's condemnation of the newbies. I think they're great. In general, it makes sense to think that newbies should be lower profile etc etc; but MeFi is different. A whole bunch of these 2K new members have been lurking for probably longer than a bunch of posting members. They've been watching the whinging and drama from the old members for years now, and they're making their voices heard. Good for them. I see very few people (but there are a few) that are obviously completely new to MeFi and don't have a clue as to what it's all about. Most seem as familiar with the way things work and personalities here as any 14Kers, at least.

Of course you would. You had to put up with everyone here thinking you were one.

Are one?

I kid because I like. Most of the time ;)
posted by The God Complex at 5:25 PM on November 23, 2004


True; but you might notice that a typical alternative reaction to being/having been a n00b is to wholeheartedly embrace the "bashing the n00b" ethic as soon as possible. Anyway, what I'm seeing these last few days are comments from people that are obviously very familiar with mefi and most of the high-profile people here. They don't "feel" like clueless newbies to me. A few do. Most don't.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 5:36 PM on November 23, 2004


Well, you're taking me far to seriously, at any rate. If I seriously had a major issue with the newbs, I would have lodged it in a much more eloquent manner.

Just like I don't think we're all douche bags.
posted by The God Complex at 5:44 PM on November 23, 2004


I'm a unique snowflake but also a douche bag. Now I have some kind of a complex. Also, snowflakes don't make very effective douche bags.
posted by Sidhedevil at 7:12 PM on November 23, 2004


DrJohnEvans-- TRUCE!

I think we've perhaps had a misunderstanding. Culture shock or something.

Isn't it pretty obvious that there is NOTHING that can be said about society as a whole by looking at Metafilter versus Metatalk posts? Isn't the inherent ridiculousness of what I typed enough to show it to be nothing but a non-serious throwaway comment in a sea of teeth-gnashing Metatalkityness? You fell into my trap by actually saying anything. "Are elephants from Mars?" "Obviously not!" says you. Well, duh!

I guess I'm pretty much a jerk, but I'm not sooooo much of a newbie that I don't know this already.
posted by Kleptophoria! at 7:28 PM on November 23, 2004


Here's a question. Would a link to a site devoted exclusively to rape Ryvar Haikus been deleted as well?

Poor Ryvar complains
Why was my post deleted?
Fuck him in the ass.

Note that I condone nether rape nor haikus of any sort and wish Ryvar and all Metatalkers a happy and rape-free Thanksgiving.
posted by euphorb at 8:09 PM on November 23, 2004


My vote goes with soyjoy's.

I notice that every time Matt has come into a MetaWhinge thread and detailed why he did what he did, the complainer's response is always "Oh. Okay."

What we had here was broken communication. Matt said "um," and while you understood it and I understood it, poor Ryvar simply did not.

Me, I understood it as the sort of sound one would apologetically make when taking care of someone else's embarassment for them.

Like your spouse ripping a tearjeaker while the two of you are dining with the Queen, and you blush, apologize profusely, and excuse yourself from the table.

In this case, the sort of sound one would apologetically make when deleting a link that if left on the web would probably mortifyingly embarass the poor, dim sod that was such a fool as to post it.

Ryvar, apparently, read it differently. Which, come to think of it, is ...

um.

[click]
posted by five fresh fish at 9:11 PM on November 23, 2004


"Did you hang up?"
"No, I just said 'click'..." *click*
posted by loquacious at 9:17 PM on November 23, 2004


Would a link to a site devoted exclusively to rape Ryvar Haikus been deleted as well?

Maybe "rape Ryvar's wife haikus" would work better.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:18 PM on November 23, 2004


Note that I condone nether rape

Ew.
posted by me3dia at 9:45 PM on November 23, 2004


Maybe "rape Ryvar's wife haikus" would work better.

I feel a poetic moment coming on...

Tasting that cock
Felt kinda good in my mouth
Straight though I am

Shit, what were we talking about? Ryvar?
posted by Krrrlson at 9:59 PM on November 23, 2004


snap
posted by Evstar at 10:01 PM on November 23, 2004


Was that supposed to offend me?
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 10:02 PM on November 23, 2004


Heck no! Surely it's as innocuous as the mention of raping someone's spouse.
posted by Krrrlson at 10:05 PM on November 23, 2004


EB, Krrrlson...

um.
posted by soyjoy at 10:07 PM on November 23, 2004


It's pretty cool to even have reasons at all. Matt is bending over backward by allowing the posts to continue to exist at the same URL, and most of them have decent enough explanations. Show me another site whose moderators handle feces with such tender loving care.

Yet, naturally, the more you give, the more you have to give.
posted by scarabic at 10:21 PM on November 23, 2004


soyjoy - I agree with Matt 55-60% of the time (on deletions) at least.

"I notice that every time Matt has come into a MetaWhinge thread and detailed why he did what he did, the complainer's response is always "Oh. Okay." " - I didn't have the response you just detailed. I can acknowledge Matt as a competent overall editor while still retaining areas of extreme disagreement.
posted by troutfishing at 10:25 PM on November 23, 2004


I think Krrlson you don't get the point at all. It is "innocuous". The only thing that offends me about people bringing that up is their assumption that it's going to offend or embarass me. It's really quite astonishing how much that assumption reveals.

But given that rape isn't a distant, abstracted thing for a whole hell of a lot of people, not to mention the mefites who've said they're surivivors, I think perhaps it's quite fitting for Ryvar to be reminded of how personal jokes about rape can really be. So, haikus about raping Ryvar's wife seems entirely appropriate to me given Ryvar (and reportedly his wife's) wholehearted approval of the rape haikus post.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 10:31 PM on November 23, 2004


So, haikus about raping Ryvar's wife seems entirely appropriate to me

well, I think that says a lot about you.
posted by angry modem at 11:47 PM on November 23, 2004


The only thing that offends me about people bringing that up is their assumption that it's going to offend or embarass me.

You really think me so stupid as to believe I'd be embarrassing you when you're practically bursting with pride on this subject and mention it at every opportunity? Jeeze, only you could find a way to turn a silly jab into self-aggrandizement.
posted by Krrrlson at 11:57 PM on November 23, 2004


Okay, sorry. I misunderstood.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 2:23 AM on November 24, 2004


It wasn't your fault, EB. It was sharon's.
posted by The God Complex at 2:38 AM on November 24, 2004


Speaking of which, has anyone capped sharon yet for poisoning ODB?
posted by The God Complex at 2:38 AM on November 24, 2004


EB: I would love to hear some haiku about raping myself/my wife. Free literary pornography? In the words of our dear president: Bring it on!
posted by Ryvar at 5:57 AM on November 24, 2004


Wait, did EB confide something about his personal bicuriosity on the "free the rape haikus" thread that I missed?

I can't believe that my lazy disinclination to read lines and lines of pseudo-high-minded blather trumped my tawdry addiction to salacious gossip. Foiled again!

And, Ryvar, your wish for rape haikus is my command:

Ryvar and his wife
On a drive through Canada
Admire fields of rape

"Fields of rape?" you say

Brassica napus; better
Known as "canola"

posted by Sidhedevil at 7:02 AM on November 24, 2004


Ryvar and his wife
On a drive through Canada
Admire fields of rape


I just want to highlight how brilliant this haiku is - the season of autumn is implied through the whole fields-waiting-for-harvest imagery. That's an incredibly subtle kigo, Sidhedevil - 10 out of 10.
posted by Ryvar at 7:06 AM on November 24, 2004


I agree with Matt 55-60% of the time (on deletions) at least.
Nobody is stopping you from going ahead and starting NoDeleteNoneOfTheTimeFilter, except for that whole pesky 'lack of a captive audience' problem.
posted by darukaru at 7:18 AM on November 24, 2004


Harvest? And here I thought there was a Sadist orgy of Dantean proportions going on in Canada, and that vegetable cooking oil was somehow involved.
posted by neckro23 at 7:31 AM on November 24, 2004


trout - I think you're responding to FFF, not to me.
posted by soyjoy at 7:36 AM on November 24, 2004


Here I thought there was a Sadist orgy of Dantean proportions going on in Canada.

Ever since they legalized gay marriage, it's been nothing but.
posted by Johnny Assay at 7:46 AM on November 24, 2004


And for the record, in case my 'um' was not sufficient (though hopefully it was clear I was using it to mean exactly what FFF was saying it meant), I agree with EB that anyone who brings up the cock-in-my-mouth ref. in unrelated discussions is saying more about himself than about EB.

But I also agree that the ref. to raping Ryvar's wife is over the line. Just because Ryvar keeps invoking her as a lame "some of my best friends" excuse doesn't mean she actually deserves to invoked by us in such an offensive way, unless and until she gets an account and we hear straight from her how funny she would consider this concept.
posted by soyjoy at 7:48 AM on November 24, 2004


Actually, soyjoy, I'm more interested in how we got onto the subject of rape in the first place because outside of a brief and needed disclaimer on my original post, I haven't mentioned it here at all.

Which to me says something about of some of the people who disagree with me.
posted by Ryvar at 8:08 AM on November 24, 2004


You know, even without a 30 day archival norm, some benevolent dictators sometimes say:
Enough! This thread is closed.
Really. We know it ain't a democracy here, and even if it were there are procedures, and here we are, off topic and personalising the whole fucking debate in a way that would - or should - embarass a fratboy. God, we're not good at this.

Matt, how about a second weapon in your armoury: as well as the scissors, howsabout the guillotine?
posted by dash_slot- at 8:44 AM on November 24, 2004


Actually, soyjoy, I'm more interested in how we got onto the subject of rape

Welll, you did strut into this thread wearing an awfully short skirt...
posted by jpoulos at 9:19 AM on November 24, 2004


I think we've perhaps had a misunderstanding. Culture shock or something.

You may be onto something, Klepto. Are you a Leafs fan, maybe?

Isn't it pretty obvious that there is NOTHING that can be said about society as a whole by looking at Metafilter versus Metatalk posts?

You'd think so, but I've found that you can never be too careful. Anyway, I'm glad to find that your intent was proper enough; I was just confused by the execution. Cheers!
posted by DrJohnEvans at 9:19 AM on November 24, 2004


Nay.
posted by Colloquial Collision at 5:55 PM on November 24, 2004


I'm about two seconds away from posting a Metatalk thread entitled "MORATORIUM ON RAPE HAIKU INJOKE USAGE!!!!!!!!111one"

Seriously. It was creeping me out before I even got to pay my five bucks.

And DrJohnEvans is now my new friend. This is way easier than the first week of Kindergarten. (BA-DUM-TIIISH) And I'm sort of indifferent to the Leafs, although my dad got a hockey stick autographed by all the players who were on the team back in Tim Horton's day. So I guess I have a spiritual love for them, or something. Usually I end up cheering for whichever Canadian team makes it the furthest in the Stanley Cup tourny.

Actually I don't really like hockey. ... What's this thread about, by the way?
posted by Kleptophoria! at 6:29 PM on November 24, 2004


Oh, I was just wondering since you'd suggested the whole culture shock bit, and saw you were in this province—see, I'm a Sens man myself. But that hockey stick story sounds pretty neat.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 8:18 PM on November 24, 2004


To summarize the latter half of this thread: I think something about something which says something about the person who said it says something about the person who said it.
posted by Bugbread at 8:40 PM on November 24, 2004


Wow. We've done our best and bugbread's still here.
posted by esch at 12:41 AM on November 25, 2004


Where?! Where?!

/* looks around quickly */
posted by Bugbread at 12:59 AM on November 25, 2004


Okay, since when were emotes c-style comments? 'Cause that's just way too damn nerdy.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:30 AM on November 25, 2004


Put me down as voting for Nader, and against reflective emotes in comments.

/* this part's a bit messy, will fix and add a witty comment later when I have time */
posted by DrJohnEvans at 7:37 AM on November 25, 2004


« Older error in database when trying to post comment   |   Blizzard's World of Warcraft Newer »

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