Banned anyway December 27, 2004 6:55 AM Subscribe
ditto. i emailed him with the self-link wiki entry and a few survival tips. i hope he'll learn the ropes and ride this out.
posted by moonbird at 7:30 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by moonbird at 7:30 AM on December 27, 2004
He sounded a little burned towards the end there, unfortunately. A shame, since most of the comments seemed helpful rather than nasty.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 7:32 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 7:32 AM on December 27, 2004
The rules are clear. Ban him.
And then I shall roast his coriander-seasoned carcass and serve it with horseradish, fennel, and radicchio on toasted rye bread.
posted by Kwantsar at 7:39 AM on December 27, 2004
And then I shall roast his coriander-seasoned carcass and serve it with horseradish, fennel, and radicchio on toasted rye bread.
posted by Kwantsar at 7:39 AM on December 27, 2004
A fourth for leniency.
And horseradish and fennel make a lousy match.
posted by CunningLinguist at 7:44 AM on December 27, 2004
And horseradish and fennel make a lousy match.
posted by CunningLinguist at 7:44 AM on December 27, 2004
Let this one slide, butif he does it again, we pike him.
posted by drezdn at 7:56 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by drezdn at 7:56 AM on December 27, 2004
Well, I do love radicchio on toasted rye bread. The tiny rye toasts? Ban him!
posted by squirrel at 8:29 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by squirrel at 8:29 AM on December 27, 2004
Cold Hearted Rationalist says:
why do you want a reprieve for Cancergiggles?
Because it's such a good link? Because it's the first infringement in a long Mefi career? Because he linked to his blog accidentally? Because this leniency will surely not be seen as a precedent, for some reason? Because the warning about self-linking leading to bans and deletions on the posting page is in type too small, and therefore easily overlooked?
I am interested, because all the calls so far havent given any reasons (apart from honest mistake...).
posted by dash_slot- at 8:33 AM on December 27, 2004
why do you want a reprieve for Cancergiggles?
Because it's such a good link? Because it's the first infringement in a long Mefi career? Because he linked to his blog accidentally? Because this leniency will surely not be seen as a precedent, for some reason? Because the warning about self-linking leading to bans and deletions on the posting page is in type too small, and therefore easily overlooked?
I am interested, because all the calls so far havent given any reasons (apart from honest mistake...).
posted by dash_slot- at 8:33 AM on December 27, 2004
Keep him around just for being named "Cancergiggles" say I.
posted by dong_resin at 8:35 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by dong_resin at 8:35 AM on December 27, 2004
To take him at his word, he didn't mean to link to his blog.
posted by drezdn at 8:36 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by drezdn at 8:36 AM on December 27, 2004
Cold Hearted Rationalist says:
why do you want a reprieve for Cancergiggles?
Because it's such a good link? Because it's the first infringement in a long Mefi career? Because he linked to his blog accidentally? Because this leniency will surely not be seen as a precedent, for some reason? Because the warning about self-linking leading to bans and deletions on the posting page is in type too small, and therefore easily overlooked?
Yeah, I say we burn him at the stake...
And some among us wonder why we have a collective reputation for being gigantic assholes.
posted by SweetJesus at 8:53 AM on December 27, 2004
why do you want a reprieve for Cancergiggles?
Because it's such a good link? Because it's the first infringement in a long Mefi career? Because he linked to his blog accidentally? Because this leniency will surely not be seen as a precedent, for some reason? Because the warning about self-linking leading to bans and deletions on the posting page is in type too small, and therefore easily overlooked?
Yeah, I say we burn him at the stake...
And some among us wonder why we have a collective reputation for being gigantic assholes.
posted by SweetJesus at 8:53 AM on December 27, 2004
SweetJesus: why so pissed at me?
posted by dash_slot- at 8:55 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by dash_slot- at 8:55 AM on December 27, 2004
Please don't ban squirrel, moonbird, etc. -- but delete their whining.
posted by cribcage at 8:55 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by cribcage at 8:55 AM on December 27, 2004
SweetJesus: why so pissed at me?
Not pissed at you specifically, but the radical sub-sect of Metafilter users who follow the guidelines or the wiki like Wahhabists follow the Koran. Your post was just the nearest example...
He doesn't need a reprieve because he shouldn't be penalized in the first place. It was a good-faith thing, so I'm not even sure why we need this thread.
I'm just getting really tired of good blue posts being derailed because someone has a stick-up their ass about the guidelines.
posted by SweetJesus at 9:03 AM on December 27, 2004
Not pissed at you specifically, but the radical sub-sect of Metafilter users who follow the guidelines or the wiki like Wahhabists follow the Koran. Your post was just the nearest example...
He doesn't need a reprieve because he shouldn't be penalized in the first place. It was a good-faith thing, so I'm not even sure why we need this thread.
I'm just getting really tired of good blue posts being derailed because someone has a stick-up their ass about the guidelines.
posted by SweetJesus at 9:03 AM on December 27, 2004
This is a Christmas Miracle. When did you guys get so nice? Mostly.
posted by geekyguy at 9:07 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by geekyguy at 9:07 AM on December 27, 2004
I don't know. How does someone accidentally link to their own blog? How does someone just not have any idea about the guidelines?
I don't know about a banning but I do think the post should be deleted. I don't really feel that self link posts are ban-worthy but I do think they require some action.
And SweetJesus, I was under the impression that the Asshole Reduction on MeFi had been a mostly successful operation. What's so assholish about following the rules?
posted by fenriq at 9:08 AM on December 27, 2004
I don't know about a banning but I do think the post should be deleted. I don't really feel that self link posts are ban-worthy but I do think they require some action.
And SweetJesus, I was under the impression that the Asshole Reduction on MeFi had been a mostly successful operation. What's so assholish about following the rules?
posted by fenriq at 9:08 AM on December 27, 2004
dash is right. Not that I have a grudge against Cancer, but really...a guy posts a movie of his daughter getting a Christmas present to the front page, and you're all patting him on the back? Even if he had just posted a link to the file and not to his blog, why is this a good MeFi post?
posted by ChrisTN at 9:13 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by ChrisTN at 9:13 AM on December 27, 2004
And SweetJesus, I was under the impression that the Asshole Reduction on MeFi had been a mostly successful operation. What's so assholish about following the rules?
What good does it do the community to ban this guy? Did he go nuts and start posting crazy shit in every thread? Did he try and back-door you into some spyware in his link? Did he use his own referral number when linking to Amazon? No, he mistakenly linked to his blog instead of a video file.
The point is, instead of saying "who cares, don't do it again, now you know, etc", someone starts talking about banning.
Jesus Christ, even felons get three-strikes.
posted by SweetJesus at 9:13 AM on December 27, 2004
What good does it do the community to ban this guy? Did he go nuts and start posting crazy shit in every thread? Did he try and back-door you into some spyware in his link? Did he use his own referral number when linking to Amazon? No, he mistakenly linked to his blog instead of a video file.
The point is, instead of saying "who cares, don't do it again, now you know, etc", someone starts talking about banning.
Jesus Christ, even felons get three-strikes.
posted by SweetJesus at 9:13 AM on December 27, 2004
Once again, a pile-on proves unnecessary (the transgression was noted once...what was the purpose of the following comments?) and unpleasant. When you pee in the pool, we all end up drinking it—will the slow kids ever learn?
posted by rushmc at 9:14 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by rushmc at 9:14 AM on December 27, 2004
Asshole Reduction on MeFi
is that like the Patriot Act to reduce terrorists?
I'm for a none-pile-on to teh cancergiggles. But...I'm not sold on that it was an honest mistake (I agree, how does someone accidently link to their own blog) but how about being human and forgive?
posted by Hands of Manos at 9:16 AM on December 27, 2004
is that like the Patriot Act to reduce terrorists?
I'm for a none-pile-on to teh cancergiggles. But...I'm not sold on that it was an honest mistake (I agree, how does someone accidently link to their own blog) but how about being human and forgive?
posted by Hands of Manos at 9:16 AM on December 27, 2004
I don't want cancergiggles banned either, but like dash_slot indicated, it's almost impossible not to get the hint when you go to the posting page. I don't think dashie was advocating taking up a collection to to pay for the wood it would take to burn CG at the stake; I think he wanted to know how we are going to differentiate it when the next hot sauce guy comes along and claims that it was all a misunderstanding.
posted by taz at 9:20 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by taz at 9:20 AM on December 27, 2004
SweetJesus, did you read just the first line of my comment? Here's the second line again for you
I don't know about a banning but I do think the post should be deleted. I don't really feel that self link posts are ban-worthy but I do think they require some action.
You see, I'm actually agreeing with you. I don't think this is anything ban-worthy but the FPP should be deleted.
And if anyone thinks this is a pile on, have you been paying attention recently? This is nothing at all. This is like a soft ocean breeze compared to the pile ons in recent weeks.
posted by fenriq at 9:22 AM on December 27, 2004
I don't know about a banning but I do think the post should be deleted. I don't really feel that self link posts are ban-worthy but I do think they require some action.
You see, I'm actually agreeing with you. I don't think this is anything ban-worthy but the FPP should be deleted.
And if anyone thinks this is a pile on, have you been paying attention recently? This is nothing at all. This is like a soft ocean breeze compared to the pile ons in recent weeks.
posted by fenriq at 9:22 AM on December 27, 2004
how about being human and forgive?
So that every time someone comes along and deliberately Billy Maulanas the site, they can be absolved simply by claiming it was a mistake? Oops? If ever there were a slippery slope toward metaspamming...
posted by Danelope at 9:24 AM on December 27, 2004
So that every time someone comes along and deliberately Billy Maulanas the site, they can be absolved simply by claiming it was a mistake? Oops? If ever there were a slippery slope toward metaspamming...
posted by Danelope at 9:24 AM on December 27, 2004
He didn't mean to link to his blog? Self-linking is the single deadly sin of MetaFilter, and he gets a pass because he didn't mean to? We're not giant assholes for enforcing the only rule that's important enough to be stated twice on the post-a-link page. We're giant assholes if we enforce it inconsistently.
You act like this rule is some arcana of a ancient book no one can read in its original language anymore, SweetJesus, but it's not. This is supposed to be a venue for neat things on the Web - not "neat things I put on the Web." The rule is meant to underline the fact that if it's right for MetaFilter, it can be found at a URL that you did not create.
You made a cool video on your Christmas vacation? Neat. Take out a text ad. Oh, hey! That's right on the post-a-link page, too!
posted by caitlinb at 9:26 AM on December 27, 2004
You act like this rule is some arcana of a ancient book no one can read in its original language anymore, SweetJesus, but it's not. This is supposed to be a venue for neat things on the Web - not "neat things I put on the Web." The rule is meant to underline the fact that if it's right for MetaFilter, it can be found at a URL that you did not create.
You made a cool video on your Christmas vacation? Neat. Take out a text ad. Oh, hey! That's right on the post-a-link page, too!
posted by caitlinb at 9:26 AM on December 27, 2004
SweetJesus:
Not that I'm taking it personally, but the only person you quoted was me.
Plus, you are the only person to use the word asshole - directly after quoting me.
I'm just wondering what exactly makes this self-link a good post in itself: what are it's redeeming features? Frankly, had anyone posted it, linking to Cancergiggles's blog, I'd be wondering that.
How does someone accidentally link to their own blog?
Exactly.
rushmc: being a member who is respected for his past upholding of community standards, what do you suggest is the use of Metatalk, in this case? Why should it be different to other similar cases?
PS: I haven't - and don't - call for a ban. Only DBAPaul (in the original thread) and Kwantsar (sarcastically?) in this thread, have done so. This is a discussion about our long-established policies. It is useful to flesh out exceptions for future reference, no?
I'm all about the forgive & move on - but CG could usefully explain how he accidentally typed the URL to his blog in the 'link' part of the posting page. Has anyone here ever done that?
posted by dash_slot- at 9:29 AM on December 27, 2004
Not that I'm taking it personally, but the only person you quoted was me.
Plus, you are the only person to use the word asshole - directly after quoting me.
I'm just wondering what exactly makes this self-link a good post in itself: what are it's redeeming features? Frankly, had anyone posted it, linking to Cancergiggles's blog, I'd be wondering that.
How does someone accidentally link to their own blog?
Exactly.
rushmc: being a member who is respected for his past upholding of community standards, what do you suggest is the use of Metatalk, in this case? Why should it be different to other similar cases?
PS: I haven't - and don't - call for a ban. Only DBAPaul (in the original thread) and Kwantsar (sarcastically?) in this thread, have done so. This is a discussion about our long-established policies. It is useful to flesh out exceptions for future reference, no?
I'm all about the forgive & move on - but CG could usefully explain how he accidentally typed the URL to his blog in the 'link' part of the posting page. Has anyone here ever done that?
posted by dash_slot- at 9:29 AM on December 27, 2004
I'm all about the forgive & move on - but CG could usefully explain how he accidentally typed the URL to his blog in the 'link' part of the posting page.
Again, I think that's the lesser of the troublesome questions. I'd like CG to usefully explain how he accidentally digitized his Christmas home video and decided it would make a nifty post to MeFi.
posted by ChrisTN at 9:34 AM on December 27, 2004
Again, I think that's the lesser of the troublesome questions. I'd like CG to usefully explain how he accidentally digitized his Christmas home video and decided it would make a nifty post to MeFi.
posted by ChrisTN at 9:34 AM on December 27, 2004
Danelope - then what do you suggest?
How about a stiff reprimand (cannot post to the frontpage for 2 weeks) and be done with it?
I'm in agreement that: "He didn't put any spyware on our computers, he didn't try to sell something."
And lastly, how many times have you willingly done something wrong, got called on it and realized "well, yeah, that was a stupid thing to do. I'm sorry." Wouldn't it be nice if someone said "well, you broke the rules, you will be punished for it...but we will exercise forgiveness"
I dunno, I'm not perfect...I've willingly screwed up a bunch in my life...I've learned from when I've done that. I never expect sympathy...but it is nice when people do forgive.
posted by Hands of Manos at 9:34 AM on December 27, 2004
How about a stiff reprimand (cannot post to the frontpage for 2 weeks) and be done with it?
I'm in agreement that: "He didn't put any spyware on our computers, he didn't try to sell something."
And lastly, how many times have you willingly done something wrong, got called on it and realized "well, yeah, that was a stupid thing to do. I'm sorry." Wouldn't it be nice if someone said "well, you broke the rules, you will be punished for it...but we will exercise forgiveness"
I dunno, I'm not perfect...I've willingly screwed up a bunch in my life...I've learned from when I've done that. I never expect sympathy...but it is nice when people do forgive.
posted by Hands of Manos at 9:34 AM on December 27, 2004
ban him. its $5 to sign up again. or just fine him $5.
posted by macadamiaranch at 9:45 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by macadamiaranch at 9:45 AM on December 27, 2004
While the skeptical arguments here are concise, logical, and absolutely well-reasoned (dash-slot, ChrisTN) , and c*g has had an at-times stormy posting history, I truly believe that this is a case of a genuine mistake that may not have been well thought out rather than an intentional stab at subverting etiquette.
I'm not patting the guy on the back, but I do think he simply didn't read the rules. Swiftly delete the thread, and let that be a warning and a learning experience. A pile-on isn't what community is all about. Anyway, I think we're calling leniency because the post wasn't shilling, it's a harmless movie of his daughter, and while hardly "best of the web," it's innocuous and meant something to the guy, a guy that has clearly been through a lot.
But I also understand the cold, rational application of the rules... no one can exactly guess intentions here. I'm crazy for saying this, but I just prefer to think of human nature as inherently good. Ultimately, Matt's got the ban hammer and it's his call. At the least, as dash noted above, this does give us a forum to discuss the guidelines and focus on quality control.
Oh, and cribcage: (redacted).
posted by moonbird at 9:46 AM on December 27, 2004
I'm not patting the guy on the back, but I do think he simply didn't read the rules. Swiftly delete the thread, and let that be a warning and a learning experience. A pile-on isn't what community is all about. Anyway, I think we're calling leniency because the post wasn't shilling, it's a harmless movie of his daughter, and while hardly "best of the web," it's innocuous and meant something to the guy, a guy that has clearly been through a lot.
But I also understand the cold, rational application of the rules... no one can exactly guess intentions here. I'm crazy for saying this, but I just prefer to think of human nature as inherently good. Ultimately, Matt's got the ban hammer and it's his call. At the least, as dash noted above, this does give us a forum to discuss the guidelines and focus on quality control.
Oh, and cribcage: (redacted).
posted by moonbird at 9:46 AM on December 27, 2004
Yeesh, I'm sorry I posted.
Have fun on the witch hunt.
posted by SweetJesus at 9:47 AM on December 27, 2004
Have fun on the witch hunt.
posted by SweetJesus at 9:47 AM on December 27, 2004
Considering that it's not that great a video (amusing, though), I would vote in favour of deletion of the front page post.
I didn't go through the links to see if it's actually video of his, but I'm hard-pressed to think of a reason to give a pass on the one cardinal rule. There certainly are conventions here, but the self-link is THE RULE.
His explanation is understood and I can believe it and he doesn't seem like a bad fellow. However...
posted by Captaintripps at 9:52 AM on December 27, 2004
I didn't go through the links to see if it's actually video of his, but I'm hard-pressed to think of a reason to give a pass on the one cardinal rule. There certainly are conventions here, but the self-link is THE RULE.
His explanation is understood and I can believe it and he doesn't seem like a bad fellow. However...
posted by Captaintripps at 9:52 AM on December 27, 2004
What witch hunt? People are being really nice about a guidline-breaking post. Wow.
posted by dabitch at 9:59 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by dabitch at 9:59 AM on December 27, 2004
Two scenarios:
posted by monju_bosatsu at 10:00 AM on December 27, 2004
(1) Poster links to his or her own blog entry, in which we find a link to a crappy video found on the web, but being hosted by the poster because the original site may not have the bandwidth to withstand being MeFried.Assume under both scenarios that video was crappy enough that it shouldn't have been posted either way. What result in each case?
(2) Poster creates own crappy video, links to it from blog, posts blog entry to MeFi.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 10:00 AM on December 27, 2004
One reason not to ban him is that most people don't want him banned. In a community with a constitution and a legal system, that wouldn't mean much, but in a self-policing community it's fairly important. There ya go.
posted by Hildago at 10:01 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by Hildago at 10:01 AM on December 27, 2004
People are being really nice about a guidline-breaking post. Wow.
It sickens me, frankly.
posted by Kwantsar at 10:11 AM on December 27, 2004
It sickens me, frankly.
posted by Kwantsar at 10:11 AM on December 27, 2004
why do you want a reprieve for Cancergiggles?
Well, since you asked, it's because he has colon cancer that's spread to his lungs and his liver. Really, truly, honestly, that's why, for me, anyway. I have no idea why everyone else is asking for him not to be banned, but that was what was in the back of my mind when I saw his post. I've read his blog a few times and I just thought it would be nice to cut him a little teensy tiny break. It's a sappy, sentimentalist kind of reason, but it is what it is. I just thought it would be nice, that's all.
And yes, yes, I know if we let him slide, then every Tom, Dick, and Harriette with inoperable lung, colon, and liver cancer is going to think that they can just waltz in here and start linking willy-nilly to their websites. It's a chance that we'll just have to take.
posted by iconomy at 10:26 AM on December 27, 2004
Well, since you asked, it's because he has colon cancer that's spread to his lungs and his liver. Really, truly, honestly, that's why, for me, anyway. I have no idea why everyone else is asking for him not to be banned, but that was what was in the back of my mind when I saw his post. I've read his blog a few times and I just thought it would be nice to cut him a little teensy tiny break. It's a sappy, sentimentalist kind of reason, but it is what it is. I just thought it would be nice, that's all.
And yes, yes, I know if we let him slide, then every Tom, Dick, and Harriette with inoperable lung, colon, and liver cancer is going to think that they can just waltz in here and start linking willy-nilly to their websites. It's a chance that we'll just have to take.
posted by iconomy at 10:26 AM on December 27, 2004
Definitely delete the post, let it slide just the once, is my vote.
posted by squidlarkin at 10:40 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by squidlarkin at 10:40 AM on December 27, 2004
Damn. I didn't include the cancer in my hypotheticals.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 10:41 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by monju_bosatsu at 10:41 AM on December 27, 2004
Metafilter: every Tom, Dick, and Harriette with inoperable lung, colon, and liver cancer is going to think that they can just waltz in here and start linking willy-nilly to their websites.
: >
posted by amberglow at 10:45 AM on December 27, 2004
: >
posted by amberglow at 10:45 AM on December 27, 2004
rushmc: being a member who is respected for his past upholding of community standards, what do you suggest is the use of Metatalk, in this case?
I wasn't referring to the MetaTalk thread, but rather to the comments in the original thread on the blue. Meta is certainly the place to have this discussion.
posted by rushmc at 10:48 AM on December 27, 2004
I wasn't referring to the MetaTalk thread, but rather to the comments in the original thread on the blue. Meta is certainly the place to have this discussion.
posted by rushmc at 10:48 AM on December 27, 2004
dash_slot-, I didn't call for a banning, I simply copied from the posting page. The very page that CG posted his self-link.
I believe that the post should be deleted, anything further is Matt's decision (despite the explicit guidelines.)
posted by DBAPaul at 10:52 AM on December 27, 2004
I believe that the post should be deleted, anything further is Matt's decision (despite the explicit guidelines.)
posted by DBAPaul at 10:52 AM on December 27, 2004
If the policy against self-linking is primarily intended to ban spammers and unrepentant self-promoters, then don't ban Cancergiggles. It doesn't appear that Cancergiggles is either. I'm sure this thread is lesson enough.
posted by effwerd at 10:52 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by effwerd at 10:52 AM on December 27, 2004
In public policy, a very severe punishment (for example, cutting off all federal education dollars to a state that fails to comply with a reporting requirement) is called the "nuclear bomb" option. It's a problematical way of enforcing policy because (not surprisingly) those who can trigger it are reluctant to do so, and when it is triggered, it is often seen as unfair.
For Metafilter, a time-specific ban on posting -- 30, 60, 90, or whatever days -- might be useful as an alternative to irrevocably removing a member (or at least an identity).
So, something like this: If you post a self-link, your posting privileges will be suspended for at least 30 days, and (depending on the what the self-link is) you may be permanently banned.
posted by WestCoaster at 10:55 AM on December 27, 2004
For Metafilter, a time-specific ban on posting -- 30, 60, 90, or whatever days -- might be useful as an alternative to irrevocably removing a member (or at least an identity).
So, something like this: If you post a self-link, your posting privileges will be suspended for at least 30 days, and (depending on the what the self-link is) you may be permanently banned.
posted by WestCoaster at 10:55 AM on December 27, 2004
What effwerd said, this isn't the friggin' Justice Department and we don't have mandatory minimums. I'd like to think that intent matters.
posted by cedar at 11:14 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by cedar at 11:14 AM on December 27, 2004
Or how about something like this: If you post a self-link, Matt will turn administrative powers for your account over to quonsar.
Personally, that would instill the fear of God into me the way a ban would never accomplish.
posted by Ryvar at 11:17 AM on December 27, 2004
Personally, that would instill the fear of God into me the way a ban would never accomplish.
posted by Ryvar at 11:17 AM on December 27, 2004
WestCoaster, I was just about to suggest a non-permanent bannination myself (although I'd have been willing to go as low as 7-14 days). Matt has given "MetaTimeOuts" before (what happened to Stan Chin's MetaTimeOut corner page?), and, after all, nothing at MeFi is really "hard and fast" (except for some of the members - and no, I don't have first-hand knowledge of that).
posted by wendell at 11:22 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by wendell at 11:22 AM on December 27, 2004
Ban him.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 11:28 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by Optimus Chyme at 11:28 AM on December 27, 2004
Oh, well if optimus says so, that settles it.
Sheesh.
posted by clever sheep at 11:33 AM on December 27, 2004
Sheesh.
posted by clever sheep at 11:33 AM on December 27, 2004
It's Christmas, it seems like an honest mistake that he now recognizes, he wasn't selling anything. I say kill the post, but let him stay.
There's a time and place for allowing exceptions; without them, you end up with people in prison for life for stealing a bicycle, because it's their third offense. Proportionality demands the application of judgment, which is why mandatory sentencing can be unfair.
Perhaps it's worth establishing some sort of temporary ban that falls short of the nuclear option, as WestCoaster suggests.
posted by pmurray63 at 11:35 AM on December 27, 2004
There's a time and place for allowing exceptions; without them, you end up with people in prison for life for stealing a bicycle, because it's their third offense. Proportionality demands the application of judgment, which is why mandatory sentencing can be unfair.
Perhaps it's worth establishing some sort of temporary ban that falls short of the nuclear option, as WestCoaster suggests.
posted by pmurray63 at 11:35 AM on December 27, 2004
Oh, well if optimus says so, that settles it.
It's a stupid post that also happens to be a self-link. Excuse me for not voting it Post of the Year.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 11:40 AM on December 27, 2004
It's a stupid post that also happens to be a self-link. Excuse me for not voting it Post of the Year.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 11:40 AM on December 27, 2004
he fucked up, but it's hardly worth a ban. Delete thread, move on.
posted by puke & cry at 11:42 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by puke & cry at 11:42 AM on December 27, 2004
In an effort to avoid clogging this space with further comment I though it was time that the Meta Stazi were outed somewhere else so Meta Penitentiary is born
posted by Cancergiggles at 12:11 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by Cancergiggles at 12:11 PM on December 27, 2004
Are you truly this stupid?
posted by Optimus Chyme at 12:16 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by Optimus Chyme at 12:16 PM on December 27, 2004
Uhm.. Not to nitpick and suddenly be confused with Stasi, but people are defending you here Cancergiggles.
/pointing out the obvious
posted by dabitch at 12:17 PM on December 27, 2004
/pointing out the obvious
posted by dabitch at 12:17 PM on December 27, 2004
So you link to your blog again?
Self-links within a thread are perfectly acceptable on Metafilter and always have been.
posted by rushmc at 12:22 PM on December 27, 2004
Self-links within a thread are perfectly acceptable on Metafilter and always have been.
posted by rushmc at 12:22 PM on December 27, 2004
While we're at it, can we delete this metatalk thread, too?
posted by naxosaxur at 12:22 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by naxosaxur at 12:22 PM on December 27, 2004
Please don't spend your time maintaining that. If you truly have a limited time left, that's an apallingly negative and unhealthy waste of it.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 12:22 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 12:22 PM on December 27, 2004
Way to be stupid, CG. WTF do you expect to accomplish with your MetaPen? Piss off even those who were giving you a break?
posted by five fresh fish at 12:23 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by five fresh fish at 12:23 PM on December 27, 2004
From the guidelines:
(note: it's ok to link to your own things as comments in threads, if it adds to the discussion and/or saves space because you're written a reply elsewhere)
And:
Follow the golden rule, treat others' opinions with the same respect that would like to be afforded.
on preview: what rushmc said.
And at the same time: bad form Cancergiggles.
posted by effwerd at 12:23 PM on December 27, 2004
(note: it's ok to link to your own things as comments in threads, if it adds to the discussion and/or saves space because you're written a reply elsewhere)
And:
Follow the golden rule, treat others' opinions with the same respect that would like to be afforded.
on preview: what rushmc said.
And at the same time: bad form Cancergiggles.
posted by effwerd at 12:23 PM on December 27, 2004
while we're chatting whats up with that "email for an art project" in tinyfont on your userpage Cancergiggles? Anything fun?
posted by dabitch at 12:28 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by dabitch at 12:28 PM on December 27, 2004
while we're chatting whats up with that "email for an art project" in tinyfont on your userpage Cancergiggles? Anything fun?
That's on everyone's userpage. Matt did it.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 12:28 PM on December 27, 2004
That's on everyone's userpage. Matt did it.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 12:28 PM on December 27, 2004
hang on.. It's on MY userpage too... and on effwerds.. and on everyones... hey.. what is that?
posted by dabitch at 12:29 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by dabitch at 12:29 PM on December 27, 2004
cancergiggles, I'm completely agog at your description of mefites "calling for everything short of the decaptitation of your young daughter".
You've been admonished with extraordinary restraint in a forum notorious for verbal abuse. And if you don't see that, well, wow. Just wow. How completely sad.
posted by clever sheep at 12:29 PM on December 27, 2004
You've been admonished with extraordinary restraint in a forum notorious for verbal abuse. And if you don't see that, well, wow. Just wow. How completely sad.
posted by clever sheep at 12:29 PM on December 27, 2004
ok, the Mefi Stazi? thats pretty weak, dude. Stop acting like a dumbass.
posted by puke & cry at 12:41 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by puke & cry at 12:41 PM on December 27, 2004
Wow, I was gonna be all sympathetic till he linked to that crap. Ban him, and decapitate his daughter.
posted by nicwolff at 12:51 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by nicwolff at 12:51 PM on December 27, 2004
"Are you truly this stupid?" and
"Follow the golden rule, treat others' opinions with the same respect that would like to be afforded."
It is kind of someone as eloquent as Optimus to make my point for me.
posted by Cancergiggles at 12:52 PM on December 27, 2004
"Follow the golden rule, treat others' opinions with the same respect that would like to be afforded."
It is kind of someone as eloquent as Optimus to make my point for me.
posted by Cancergiggles at 12:52 PM on December 27, 2004
Yeah, I was going to be sympathetic. But not now. Too bad, Cancergiggles, you had some goodwill here, but I believe you just doused it in kerosene and set a match to it. RTF rules next time.
posted by Sidhedevil at 12:56 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by Sidhedevil at 12:56 PM on December 27, 2004
Holy fucking shit, people.
We were erring on the side of being charitable to someone who, if he didn't know better before about a primary rule, quite definitely does now, and in the space of a couple hours, the kindness has been squashed to 2D, Godwin has infected this thread a dozen times over.
I knew nothing about this person's condition, nor for this discussion do I care. It was a mistake that didn't make or lose anyone any money, and now there's piles of hate on both sides.
You wonder why non-mefites think we're a bunch of whiny fucks in here. It's because we are.
Fucking hell.
posted by chicobangs at 12:56 PM on December 27, 2004
We were erring on the side of being charitable to someone who, if he didn't know better before about a primary rule, quite definitely does now, and in the space of a couple hours, the kindness has been squashed to 2D, Godwin has infected this thread a dozen times over.
I knew nothing about this person's condition, nor for this discussion do I care. It was a mistake that didn't make or lose anyone any money, and now there's piles of hate on both sides.
You wonder why non-mefites think we're a bunch of whiny fucks in here. It's because we are.
Fucking hell.
posted by chicobangs at 12:56 PM on December 27, 2004
Ah, I see it wasn't actually your same blog that you linked to but a new one with the same style.
I think everyone agrees the self-link thing was an honest mistake. Don't worry, the pastel-suited jackals are not planning a SWAT-style raid of your home as we speak.
posted by euphorb at 12:58 PM on December 27, 2004
I think everyone agrees the self-link thing was an honest mistake. Don't worry, the pastel-suited jackals are not planning a SWAT-style raid of your home as we speak.
posted by euphorb at 12:58 PM on December 27, 2004
"Ban him, and decapitate his daughter" nicwolff
Matt. Shouldn't this sort of incitement to violence and hatred result in a ban for this thug?
posted by Cancergiggles at 12:58 PM on December 27, 2004
Matt. Shouldn't this sort of incitement to violence and hatred result in a ban for this thug?
posted by Cancergiggles at 12:58 PM on December 27, 2004
"ban him. its $5 to sign up again. or just fine him $5"
Just for the record I donated twice (once under my own name) because I thought it was a really worthwhile community. For the most part I was correct.
posted by Cancergiggles at 1:04 PM on December 27, 2004
Just for the record I donated twice (once under my own name) because I thought it was a really worthwhile community. For the most part I was correct.
posted by Cancergiggles at 1:04 PM on December 27, 2004
"Are you truly this stupid?" and
"Follow the golden rule, treat others' opinions with the same respect that would like to be afforded."
It is kind of someone as eloquent as Optimus to make my point for me.
Stop fucking posting.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 1:05 PM on December 27, 2004
"Follow the golden rule, treat others' opinions with the same respect that would like to be afforded."
It is kind of someone as eloquent as Optimus to make my point for me.
Stop fucking posting.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 1:05 PM on December 27, 2004
"Ban him, and decapitate his daughter" nicwolff
Matt. Shouldn't this sort of incitement to violence and hatred result in a ban for this thug?
CG, it was your idea.
posted by DBAPaul at 1:07 PM on December 27, 2004
Matt. Shouldn't this sort of incitement to violence and hatred result in a ban for this thug?
CG, it was your idea.
posted by DBAPaul at 1:07 PM on December 27, 2004
Shouldn't this sort of incitement to violence and hatred result in a ban for this thug?
If you're going to engage in over-the-top hyperbole, you can't expect people not to make jokes about it. Getting offended when someone quotes your own hyperbole back atcha is ridiculous.
posted by CunningLinguist at 1:07 PM on December 27, 2004
If you're going to engage in over-the-top hyperbole, you can't expect people not to make jokes about it. Getting offended when someone quotes your own hyperbole back atcha is ridiculous.
posted by CunningLinguist at 1:07 PM on December 27, 2004
Two neoFite flame-out in the same day? I guess the merriment of the season has worn thin already.
Also what fff and Sidhedevil said.
posted by squeak at 1:08 PM on December 27, 2004
Also what fff and Sidhedevil said.
posted by squeak at 1:08 PM on December 27, 2004
well, i'm really disappointed as to where this is going.
i wonder what's going on outside?
posted by moonbird at 1:13 PM on December 27, 2004
i wonder what's going on outside?
posted by moonbird at 1:13 PM on December 27, 2004
Must be something in the eggnog. The whole thread started with "please don't ban him for an honest mistake" and then Honest-mistake guy calls for the decapitation of own daughter, and does a double-whine when that line is used as a joke against him. Just another episode of the Blogged and the Beautiful. Tune in same time tomorrow.
posted by dabitch at 1:13 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by dabitch at 1:13 PM on December 27, 2004
Two words. Ducking stool.
posted by apocalypse miaow at 1:54 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by apocalypse miaow at 1:54 PM on December 27, 2004
Is "Kaycee Nicole" Swenson trolling us?
posted by five fresh fish at 2:03 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by five fresh fish at 2:03 PM on December 27, 2004
Fa la la la la, la la la la....
tis the season to be jolly...
posted by Hands of Manos at 2:05 PM on December 27, 2004
tis the season to be jolly...
posted by Hands of Manos at 2:05 PM on December 27, 2004
This is what happens when people don't know enough to Step Away From The Keyboard.
Note to any other new-ish people who are unaware how things work around here:
If you ever find yourself in this situation, especially where people are willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, take a deep breath, step away from the keyboard, and allow them to do it. I have seen countless threads where users kept coming back to defend themselves, even when the more rational members repeatedly said "Shut up, you're making it much worse."
If you don't take that advice, and show some restraint, generally speaking, you dig your own hole.
Just sayin'.
posted by exlotuseater at 2:26 PM on December 27, 2004
Note to any other new-ish people who are unaware how things work around here:
If you ever find yourself in this situation, especially where people are willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, take a deep breath, step away from the keyboard, and allow them to do it. I have seen countless threads where users kept coming back to defend themselves, even when the more rational members repeatedly said "Shut up, you're making it much worse."
If you don't take that advice, and show some restraint, generally speaking, you dig your own hole.
Just sayin'.
posted by exlotuseater at 2:26 PM on December 27, 2004
stop feeding the troll.
posted by crunchland at 3:11 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by crunchland at 3:11 PM on December 27, 2004
I'm a newbie myself, but I think exlotuseater is right on the money. This sort of thing has happened to me on joining message boards, and happened to me, though not quite so horribly, when I came here a little while ago. It was mostly my fault, but the sin was one of ignorance: it's hard to know when to step away, especially when the issue is how your new image is going to be defined within a community that you're excited to be part of, one that is based in part on the quality of your comments. You'd like to justify those things you said, since they were the very first things that most heard from you, so you rehash it 'til it's just a soupy mush.
It scared the hell out of me at first, but it seems like people here are usually level-headed enough that an early incident is slowly forgotten. There'll be threads tomorrow. I feel as though I should keep this in mind as I get established here: new people don't know this. They deserve a little forgiveness, at least on that point.
Best of luck to Cancergiggles, davy, and others in the same position. I hope that, by keeping a sense of humor about it, we can all slowly become useful members of the community at large.
posted by koeselitz at 3:12 PM on December 27, 2004
It scared the hell out of me at first, but it seems like people here are usually level-headed enough that an early incident is slowly forgotten. There'll be threads tomorrow. I feel as though I should keep this in mind as I get established here: new people don't know this. They deserve a little forgiveness, at least on that point.
Best of luck to Cancergiggles, davy, and others in the same position. I hope that, by keeping a sense of humor about it, we can all slowly become useful members of the community at large.
posted by koeselitz at 3:12 PM on December 27, 2004
exlotuseater is absolutely and precisely right. Further (for many of you), don't be so sore that you're new, and on the lower rung in some ways; everybody here was unknown when they first stepped in, and had to go through pretty much exactly what you are experiencing. If you resent that, it's like being angry with somebody you've just met because they don't consider you a close friend right away. Please take my most oft-given advice to everybody everywhere, and try to relax. Whatever will come, will come in its own time - you can't force a flower to bloom, but as exlostuseater has suggested, you can kill the seed before it has a chance to flower.
posted by taz at 3:15 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by taz at 3:15 PM on December 27, 2004
Further (for many of you), don't be so sore that you're new, and on the lower rung in some ways...That roughly sums up the attitude of MeFi, as I've discovered since joining. (Previously, I read MeFi for links. I had no idea how warped and pathetic this place is.
posted by cribcage at 3:28 PM on December 27, 2004
Happy days and Seasons greetings to one and all. Many thanks, I'm going to go play something else now
posted by Cancergiggles at 3:43 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by Cancergiggles at 3:43 PM on December 27, 2004
closes parentheses in warped and pathetic manner)
posted by andrew cooke at 3:44 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by andrew cooke at 3:44 PM on December 27, 2004
oh poop. where did you come from?
posted by andrew cooke at 3:45 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by andrew cooke at 3:45 PM on December 27, 2004
That roughly sums up the attitude of MeFi, as I've discovered since joining. (Previously, I read MeFi for links. I had no idea how warped and pathetic this place is.
Preposterous. If you "read MeFi" for an extended period of time, as many of you newbs claim to have done, the ONLY function you lacked was the ability to comment. Nothing is hidden from the eyes of non-members; you would have witnessed firsthand the maddening banter that takes place both here and on MetaFilter proper.
Claiming that membership has proven a dark relevation, where MetaFilter's seedy underbelly was exposed in the oily light of your five-shekel fare to Charon, is either a fallacy or a willful ignorance. The only novelty echoed through these cold chambers...is you.
posted by Danelope at 3:51 PM on December 27, 2004
Preposterous. If you "read MeFi" for an extended period of time, as many of you newbs claim to have done, the ONLY function you lacked was the ability to comment. Nothing is hidden from the eyes of non-members; you would have witnessed firsthand the maddening banter that takes place both here and on MetaFilter proper.
Claiming that membership has proven a dark relevation, where MetaFilter's seedy underbelly was exposed in the oily light of your five-shekel fare to Charon, is either a fallacy or a willful ignorance. The only novelty echoed through these cold chambers...is you.
posted by Danelope at 3:51 PM on December 27, 2004
I'm going to go play something else now
If you don't wish to incite further negative reaction, CG, then you might want to clarify what you mean by this. Often, trolls protest that they've just been "playing around" when really, they've been playing the fool.
posted by clever sheep at 3:54 PM on December 27, 2004
If you don't wish to incite further negative reaction, CG, then you might want to clarify what you mean by this. Often, trolls protest that they've just been "playing around" when really, they've been playing the fool.
posted by clever sheep at 3:54 PM on December 27, 2004
Script Postum: If your primary contribution to *.metafilter.com is to whinge about fellow members, why bother returning?
posted by Danelope at 3:55 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by Danelope at 3:55 PM on December 27, 2004
cribcage, I was trying to keep things short, but when I said "lower rung" (if that is the offending phrase), what I meant is this (according to what I, myself, went through): You have no recognizable persona at first, and no credibility. You haven't engaged in any real exchanges with anybody yet, and therefore you don't have any person-to-person history either, and probably no real supporters or detractors. Even when you do say something smart or insightful, it's not very likely that anybody will make a comment recognizing it (this won't change, by the way), but it does, little by little build on the idea of "who you are". Basically, it pretty much works the same way as in real life... just as warped and pathetic as that is, if it is.
posted by taz at 3:58 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by taz at 3:58 PM on December 27, 2004
Just remember this, Mr. Potter, that this rabble you're talking about... they do most of the working and paying and living and dying in this community. Well, is it too much to have them work and pay and live and die in a couple of decent rooms and a bath? Anyway, my father didn't think so. People were human beings to him, but to you, a warped, frustrated old man, they're cattle... This town needs this measly one-horse institution if only to have some place where people can come without crawling to Potter.
*n.b., this is a joke. I love metafilter as I do my soul, but the parallelism was too funny not to note.
posted by koeselitz at 4:04 PM on December 27, 2004
*n.b., this is a joke. I love metafilter as I do my soul, but the parallelism was too funny not to note.
posted by koeselitz at 4:04 PM on December 27, 2004
I merely meant - clever sheep - that this has become boring thanks to the usual suspects. I did not mean that I was playing when it started, however when people begin taking themselves seriously they look very, very funny - for a while.
posted by Cancergiggles at 4:10 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by Cancergiggles at 4:10 PM on December 27, 2004
What taz said.
You noobs have no respect and no current value to us old-timers. That's not because you haven't done anything worth our respect: it's that you haven't done anything.
At any given time you have the ability to add to your reputation.
Some of you have chosen to develop a reputation as a blind, bull-headed, or clueless git. Some of you have chosen to develop a reputation as a belligerant, foolish tit. And yet others have chosen to develop a reputation for thoughtful, rational, and interesting prose.
Noobs, you're going to get out of this what you put into it. Choose wisely.
posted by five fresh fish at 4:50 PM on December 27, 2004
You noobs have no respect and no current value to us old-timers. That's not because you haven't done anything worth our respect: it's that you haven't done anything.
At any given time you have the ability to add to your reputation.
Some of you have chosen to develop a reputation as a blind, bull-headed, or clueless git. Some of you have chosen to develop a reputation as a belligerant, foolish tit. And yet others have chosen to develop a reputation for thoughtful, rational, and interesting prose.
Noobs, you're going to get out of this what you put into it. Choose wisely.
posted by five fresh fish at 4:50 PM on December 27, 2004
That sort of language is fairly typical of those sanctimonious block heads who support decaying cults. What on earth makes you think I would welcome respect from such a person, let alone gag free speech to earn it. This is MetaTalk not the bloody vatican.
posted by Cancergiggles at 5:13 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by Cancergiggles at 5:13 PM on December 27, 2004
At any given time you have the ability to add to your reputation.
Is there a button for this? I've only got Preview, Post and Spell Check.
Some of you have chosen to develop a reputation as a blind, bull-headed, or clueless git. Some of you have chosen to develop a reputation as a belligerant, foolish tit. And yet others have chosen to develop a reputation for thoughtful, rational, and interesting prose.
I like to think I have been all three. ;)
on preview: hoo boy, Cg, just when I'm trying to lighten the mood around here.
posted by effwerd at 5:15 PM on December 27, 2004
Is there a button for this? I've only got Preview, Post and Spell Check.
Some of you have chosen to develop a reputation as a blind, bull-headed, or clueless git. Some of you have chosen to develop a reputation as a belligerant, foolish tit. And yet others have chosen to develop a reputation for thoughtful, rational, and interesting prose.
I like to think I have been all three. ;)
on preview: hoo boy, Cg, just when I'm trying to lighten the mood around here.
posted by effwerd at 5:15 PM on December 27, 2004
I like to think I have been all three me too effwerd but my experience is that those he have a need to point it out to others are normally just guilty of the first two. Thanks for the thought, although my mood is always light
posted by Cancergiggles at 5:22 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by Cancergiggles at 5:22 PM on December 27, 2004
I have been reading MeFi for years (honestly ;)) and five fresh fish earned my respect throughout that time by offering significant contributions to the community. I can't answer as to why you might want his respect, but to the rest of us noobs who actually seem to value this community, we might just want it because we want to feel like we, too, have contributed significantly to MeFi.
What are you contributing?
on preview: you may be right, but I think most of the bad blood you are accumulating here is not reflected in fff's post. He was giving honest and sincere advise.
posted by effwerd at 5:29 PM on December 27, 2004
What are you contributing?
on preview: you may be right, but I think most of the bad blood you are accumulating here is not reflected in fff's post. He was giving honest and sincere advise.
posted by effwerd at 5:29 PM on December 27, 2004
another episode of the Blogged and the Beautiful. Tune in same time tomorrow.
Not much makes me go 'hehehehehe', but that did.
Cancergiggles: I both emailed you, and simply asked for some explanations as to how (this small thing that you did) occurred. Answer came there none.
No biggie? True, in the great scheme of things. But this ain't the great scheme of things: it's a community website. We can only successfully operate, grow and reach each other if we agree how to do it, together. We influence the culture, but mathowie (who, despite some recent protestations on other threads, deserves one shedload of respect) makes up the guidelines. He doesn't like self-links: bigly. Really, stepping over his clearly stated way of doing this is just really, really rude. It offends me as a poster who will not do what you have done - which it is impossible to do 'accidentally'.
I know you won't profit commercially - nor would most bloggers who could self-link here: that is, to be frank, irrelevant. To go and set up a blog specifically to take the piss outta those who simply want to uphold community standards is provocative, and added to the lack of regret, well, I'm just blown away.
I now couldn't give two hoots about your future membership here. You changed a neutral to an opponent. I'll consider carefully any contribution made under the name Cancergiggles now, for trolling, timewasting and link whoring. Great result.
Yes, I know - you do have more important stuff to get through: I wish you well with all of that. Sincerely.
posted by dash_slot- at 5:32 PM on December 27, 2004
Not much makes me go 'hehehehehe', but that did.
Cancergiggles: I both emailed you, and simply asked for some explanations as to how (this small thing that you did) occurred. Answer came there none.
No biggie? True, in the great scheme of things. But this ain't the great scheme of things: it's a community website. We can only successfully operate, grow and reach each other if we agree how to do it, together. We influence the culture, but mathowie (who, despite some recent protestations on other threads, deserves one shedload of respect) makes up the guidelines. He doesn't like self-links: bigly. Really, stepping over his clearly stated way of doing this is just really, really rude. It offends me as a poster who will not do what you have done - which it is impossible to do 'accidentally'.
I know you won't profit commercially - nor would most bloggers who could self-link here: that is, to be frank, irrelevant. To go and set up a blog specifically to take the piss outta those who simply want to uphold community standards is provocative, and added to the lack of regret, well, I'm just blown away.
I now couldn't give two hoots about your future membership here. You changed a neutral to an opponent. I'll consider carefully any contribution made under the name Cancergiggles now, for trolling, timewasting and link whoring. Great result.
Yes, I know - you do have more important stuff to get through: I wish you well with all of that. Sincerely.
posted by dash_slot- at 5:32 PM on December 27, 2004
No you are wrong. I honestly thought that when clicked, the URL would immediately download the file and launch Windows Media Player, just as it had done when I clicked the link on my blog. I knew early on that I had made a mistake and very clearly apologized for it with an assurance that I wouldn't make the same mistake again. Matt has removed the post (I emailed him to say that I respected his decision and that I would probably have done the same) so I can't refer you to the exact phraseology.
10 hours later the garbage is still being talked and I'm sorry, the fact that I am new to something is not an excuse for abuse and censorship.
I now couldn't give two hoots about your future membership here. Well much as I love MetaFilter it isn't a major issue in my life either.
I'm absolutely sure that as a child I never engaged in the the practice of pulling the wings off flies. Only now at the age of 50 am I beginning to realize what I missed.
posted by Cancergiggles at 5:50 PM on December 27, 2004
10 hours later the garbage is still being talked and I'm sorry, the fact that I am new to something is not an excuse for abuse and censorship.
I now couldn't give two hoots about your future membership here. Well much as I love MetaFilter it isn't a major issue in my life either.
I'm absolutely sure that as a child I never engaged in the the practice of pulling the wings off flies. Only now at the age of 50 am I beginning to realize what I missed.
posted by Cancergiggles at 5:50 PM on December 27, 2004
Does everyone have enough rope yet? Great.
Then could we just close the thread, please? No one's doing themselves any favors by flailing at what is now horseburgers here. No good will be done by further "clarifying" anything.
That's experience. Move on. Everyone.
(Not that I expect for one moment for this to be the last comment in this thread. Happy Happy.)
posted by chicobangs at 5:59 PM on December 27, 2004
Then could we just close the thread, please? No one's doing themselves any favors by flailing at what is now horseburgers here. No good will be done by further "clarifying" anything.
That's experience. Move on. Everyone.
(Not that I expect for one moment for this to be the last comment in this thread. Happy Happy.)
posted by chicobangs at 5:59 PM on December 27, 2004
ENDED
posted by Cancergiggles at 6:02 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by Cancergiggles at 6:02 PM on December 27, 2004
Geeze. This thread is already 65% of the size of i_cola's post on the tsumai. Why not just let it go and move on? The post is already gone. Let's put this in perspective folks.
That said, your contrite initial responses do not explain the spitesite you created, CG.
On preview, what Chico said.
posted by bodabutton at 6:03 PM on December 27, 2004
That said, your contrite initial responses do not explain the spitesite you created, CG.
On preview, what Chico said.
posted by bodabutton at 6:03 PM on December 27, 2004
No you are wrong. I honestly thought that when clicked, the URL would immediately download the file and launch Windows Media Player, just as it had done when I clicked the link on my blog.
CG, you still don't understand the nature of your mistake. My understanding was that this was a video made, uploaded, and hosted by you. You should not link to that, because it is a self link, whether the link was directly to the video or indirectly through your blog. Please understand that the vast majority of the commentators in both this thread and your deleted thread have been remarkably civil given the fact that you pretty blantantly broke Rule Numero Uno. I agree with those above who suggested that your best strategy is to drop the issue. Your repeated and annoying defenses are only drawing the ire of the community.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 6:03 PM on December 27, 2004
CG, you still don't understand the nature of your mistake. My understanding was that this was a video made, uploaded, and hosted by you. You should not link to that, because it is a self link, whether the link was directly to the video or indirectly through your blog. Please understand that the vast majority of the commentators in both this thread and your deleted thread have been remarkably civil given the fact that you pretty blantantly broke Rule Numero Uno. I agree with those above who suggested that your best strategy is to drop the issue. Your repeated and annoying defenses are only drawing the ire of the community.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 6:03 PM on December 27, 2004
And ... it looks like I was a minute too slow.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 6:04 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by monju_bosatsu at 6:04 PM on December 27, 2004
Upon reading the rest of this thread, I withdraw my support of a less-than-permanent ban of cancergiggly.
And the "NO SELF LINKING" rule applies to media files hosted at one's personal site, and always has. When I saw the URL of your link (I always check it out, having experienced unpleasant surprises in the past), I knew right then that you were in violation (and never clicked the link). Which is basically what monju said, but in words that I hope even davy can understand.
I'm absolutely sure that as a child I never engaged in the the practice of pulling the wings off flies, either. Only now at the age of 49 have I truly learned the difference between that activity and squashing poisonous spiders.
posted by wendell at 6:08 PM on December 27, 2004
And the "NO SELF LINKING" rule applies to media files hosted at one's personal site, and always has. When I saw the URL of your link (I always check it out, having experienced unpleasant surprises in the past), I knew right then that you were in violation (and never clicked the link). Which is basically what monju said, but in words that I hope even davy can understand.
I'm absolutely sure that as a child I never engaged in the the practice of pulling the wings off flies, either. Only now at the age of 49 have I truly learned the difference between that activity and squashing poisonous spiders.
posted by wendell at 6:08 PM on December 27, 2004
I have been reading MeFi for years (honestly ;)) and five fresh fish earned my respect throughout that time by offering significant contributions to the community. I can't answer as to why you might want his respect, but to the rest of us noobs who actually seem to value this community, we might just want it because we want to feel like we, too, have contributed significantly to MeFi.
'xactly. I'd been reading MeFi for months, if not years, before I happened to snag a membership. There were old-timers that I read that I developed respect for, and as a noob, I tried to contribute in ways that would demonstrate that respect. Or if you care to intrepet a different way, I tried to emulate them. Or in yet another way, I behaved in a way that would attract their positive attention.
Any which way you want to spin it, the basic idea is that I chose to behave in ways that would be well-received by those I respected. And I still do, even when I screw up.
Or in the simplest terms, you get the respect you deserve.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:29 PM on December 27, 2004
'xactly. I'd been reading MeFi for months, if not years, before I happened to snag a membership. There were old-timers that I read that I developed respect for, and as a noob, I tried to contribute in ways that would demonstrate that respect. Or if you care to intrepet a different way, I tried to emulate them. Or in yet another way, I behaved in a way that would attract their positive attention.
Any which way you want to spin it, the basic idea is that I chose to behave in ways that would be well-received by those I respected. And I still do, even when I screw up.
Or in the simplest terms, you get the respect you deserve.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:29 PM on December 27, 2004
I vote for mercy, but then I agree with GK Chesterton:
"Children are innocent and love justice, while most adults are wicked and prefer mercy."
posted by Slagman at 7:34 PM on December 27, 2004
"Children are innocent and love justice, while most adults are wicked and prefer mercy."
posted by Slagman at 7:34 PM on December 27, 2004
Claiming that membership has proven a dark relevation, where MetaFilter's seedy underbelly was exposed in the oily light of your five-shekel fare to Charon, is either a fallacy or a willful ignorance. The only novelty echoed through these cold chambers...is you.
Danelope, that was pure Rod Serling. Bravo.
posted by George_Spiggott at 7:53 PM on December 27, 2004
Danelope, that was pure Rod Serling. Bravo.
posted by George_Spiggott at 7:53 PM on December 27, 2004
Wow.
posted by interrobang at 8:09 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by interrobang at 8:09 PM on December 27, 2004
Well, this thread was all shits and giggles.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:09 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:09 PM on December 27, 2004
Well, I'm about a decade late, but you know what, numberone doesn't even self link the cool stuff he does to FPP, so this moron does it and he keeps his account. I say you bounce'm.
posted by jmgorman at 8:29 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by jmgorman at 8:29 PM on December 27, 2004
You have no recognizable persona at first, and no credibility. You haven't engaged in any real exchanges with anybody yet... [etc.]Dude. It's a website.
posted by cribcage at 9:09 PM on December 27, 2004
Dude. It's a conversation.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:48 PM on December 27, 2004
posted by five fresh fish at 10:48 PM on December 27, 2004
Deck the halls with lots of snarking
Fa la la, la la la
This the season to be snarky
fa la la la, la la la
Troll the ancient yuel tide snarkings
Fa la la la la, la la la la
Strike the grey and join the chorus
Fa la la la la, la la la la
Follow me in merry measure,
Fa la la la la, la la la la
While I tell of lots of snarking,
Fa la la la la, la la la la
Fast away the old year passes,
Fa la la la la, la la la la
Hail the n00bs, ye lads and lasses,
Fa la la la la, la la la la
It's all jonmc's fault for starting this. Since he posted I can't get my version of Deck the Halls out of my head. Or maybe I can explain it away as just being one sick and twisted puppy ;)
posted by squeak at 5:47 AM on December 28, 2004
Fa la la, la la la
This the season to be snarky
fa la la la, la la la
Troll the ancient yuel tide snarkings
Fa la la la la, la la la la
Strike the grey and join the chorus
Fa la la la la, la la la la
Follow me in merry measure,
Fa la la la la, la la la la
While I tell of lots of snarking,
Fa la la la la, la la la la
Fast away the old year passes,
Fa la la la la, la la la la
Hail the n00bs, ye lads and lasses,
Fa la la la la, la la la la
It's all jonmc's fault for starting this. Since he posted I can't get my version of Deck the Halls out of my head. Or maybe I can explain it away as just being one sick and twisted puppy ;)
posted by squeak at 5:47 AM on December 28, 2004
« Older How does one post to Ask Metafilter Anonymous? | Always blaming the US media/government Newer »
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by squirrel at 6:56 AM on December 27, 2004