And it's not even page 3 February 2, 2005 2:07 PM   Subscribe

NewsFilter
posted by DevilsAdvocate to Etiquette/Policy at 2:07 PM (39 comments total)

Yeah, so I've learned to just bite my tongue and let my blood pressure go up that much more most of the time at NewsFilter posts. In fact, I wasn't going to say anything on the first one alone. But really, two in one day that are nothing more than links to a single CNN article?? And not some deeply-buried, little-seen articles, but both articles that are, or have recently been, on CNN's front page?

(For those of you inclined to say "If you don't like it, just skip it": If you don't like this MeTa thread, just skip it.)
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 2:07 PM on February 2, 2005


heheh
posted by mischief at 2:11 PM on February 2, 2005


And this is biting your tongue how?
posted by fenriq at 2:34 PM on February 2, 2005


A single CNN link is not a great basis for a post, I agree. When I think newsfilter, I think big headlining stories that are in all the papers. These two seem a little bit more out of the way than the Bush gaffe-du-jour, for example.

The tried-as-an-adult story is particularly weak, because there must be a wealth of resources on the subject that could have been aggregated and presented. But the unqitting coffee model post is funny and bizarre enough to carry itself.
posted by scarabic at 2:41 PM on February 2, 2005


The point is less the link than the comments the link elicits.
posted by orthogonality at 2:53 PM on February 2, 2005


The first one was a weak post, and i think the user posted it like "hey here's this thing in the news but here's what I really think" which isn't exactly what mefi posts are for, but the other one, while being newsfiltery, seems like significant enough news to rise above the CNN story of the day noise.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 2:54 PM on February 2, 2005


The point is less the link than the comments the link elicits.

Which basically ignores the fact that mefi is a site about LINKS.
posted by justgary at 3:01 PM on February 2, 2005


The point is less the link than the comments the link elicits.

If that were true, the first of the two posts would be the better (or at least less bad) of the two, for the admittedly decent discussion it generated. But both scarabic and #1 have pegged the first as the weaker of the two.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 3:14 PM on February 2, 2005


And this is biting your tongue how?

I'm sorry that I put the qualifier "most of the time" all the way on the second line, which was clearly too far along for you to have been bothered to read it.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 3:18 PM on February 2, 2005


So if CNN decides to put a story on their front page, now it's not good for metafilter?

I thought newsfilter was more like "let's discuss this current event with a link to the CNN front page", not "this story was on a news site".
posted by smackfu at 3:21 PM on February 2, 2005


NewsFilter

Agreed
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 3:26 PM on February 2, 2005


So if CNN decides to put a story on their front page, now it's not good for metafilter?

"Now?" When has it ever been?

not "this story was on a news site"

I'd make a distinction between "this story was on a news site" and "this story was on the front page of a major news site."
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 3:28 PM on February 2, 2005


For the record: I am skipping this MeTa thread.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 3:31 PM on February 2, 2005


Was it intentional to put the link to the coffee story in the word 'Filter'? Because if it was I declare you clever.
posted by rooftop secrets at 3:40 PM on February 2, 2005


(Author of post.)

You know what? I'll defend that post. Just because it's on CNN or in the news doesn't make it unworthy of discussion. It's not like I posted about some lost guitar, or Martha Stewart's new gig, or smoking is bad mmkay. It seemed to me a fundamentally interesting question, one way more interesting than why Orlando Bloom split up with Kate Bosworth.

Surely there is room on MeFi to discuss rights and rightlessness. Begrudging acceptance that the discussion was "admittedly decent" seems to entirely miss the point. I'll take discussion over linkspam any day of the week.

This being said, I didn't need as much of my opinion in the headline. Definitely true; was just trying to keep the discussion about the rights (interesting) and not about the Zoloft. And this _is_ mathowie's playground, so if he saw this as weak, I'll respect that.
posted by effugas at 3:41 PM on February 2, 2005


Metafilter is my favorite site on the web. Second most visited next to google. And it has been for a few years now. I love it. A great little daily collection of interesting stuff. The only thing that has ever bummed me out about this site is the bickering about posts being reposts, or not being FPP worthy, or being newsfilter or fill-in-the-blank-filter, etc... And the thought that bickering like that is likely keeping people from posting stuff on here that I would like to read.
posted by gummo at 3:42 PM on February 2, 2005


DevilsAdvocate, I read it and understood it, I was just pointing out that starting with "I've learned to just bite my tongue" and then showing exactly how you aren't biting your tongue in this case is kind of stupid.

For what its worth, I didn't bother with the Tried As An Adult FPP because it didn't interest me. The Taster's Choice one did and I commented on it in the thread.

Also, its nice that you're not willing to just "skip it" on threads you don't like but want others to just "skip" this MeTa thread. Seems like a double standard to me.

And yeah, I have to agree with gummo, the Dump On Bummer Patrol has been working extra hours for the last few months and it does kind of suck to have the first few comments debate the relative value of the FPP rather than the FPP.

Especially if the constant nitpicking is keeping people from posting what could be good posts.
posted by fenriq at 4:04 PM on February 2, 2005


i thought the taster's choice link was interesting ... and it's something i probably wouldn't have heard about otherwise
posted by pyramid termite at 4:13 PM on February 2, 2005


While I agree that CNN as a link choice was a bad, I think that the discussion that materialised in the thread about juvenile justice was a fairly good. It doesn't always work out that way.
posted by terrapin at 5:09 PM on February 2, 2005


Do we really hate CNN that much?
posted by effugas at 5:37 PM on February 2, 2005


Also, its nice that you're not willing to just "skip it" on threads you don't like but want others to just "skip" this MeTa thread. Seems like a double standard to me.

"For those of you inclined to say "If you don't like it, just skip it": If you don't like this MeTa thread, just skip it.)"

I don't think he's telling everyone that disagrees to skip this thread, fenriq. Only those who would use an argument which consists solely of "if you don't like just scroll down". Fair's fair, right?
posted by Stauf at 5:43 PM on February 2, 2005


maybe CNN wants to advertise here instead of SG? ; >
posted by amberglow at 5:46 PM on February 2, 2005


The only thing that has ever bummed me out about this site is the bickering about posts being reposts, or not being FPP worthy, or being newsfilter or fill-in-the-blank-filter, etc...

The biggest reason that you've found quality here, and kept coming back, is because other people cared enough to make an effort to bring poor posts to Metatalk to engage the community in discussion about what makes Metafilter worthwhile.

You're welcome.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:04 PM on February 2, 2005


I've got a question, and it's a serious question:

If I think that the first post was kind of weak (which I do), but then I commented several times in the discussion (which I did), does that make me a bad person? I mean in the MeFi sense, I already know I'm a bad person in the other sense. But I was hoping to start with a new and refreshingly clean slate on MeFi.
posted by OmieWise at 6:34 PM on February 2, 2005


I read effugas' post above and I have to say I support his rationale 123%. Nevertheless, I skipped both of the NewsFilter posts because NewsFilter is not my style. I also skip most of the OnlineComicsFilter posts because they're not my style. Not to mention ComputerGeekFilter posts. If I don't like the general subject, I just avoid those posts. There are frequently plenty of subjects I do enjoy, and others that evoke negative comments as well. But if I can see something is plainly not up my alley, I mostly just move on to the next post.

I decided to contribute to this thread only because I am a fan of useless pile-ons.
posted by Doohickie at 6:39 PM on February 2, 2005


OmieWise- Don't worry about whether MeFi thinks your a bad person. I'm sure that if Gandhi posted here, there would be someone who would hate him and thought he was ruining MeFi.
posted by Doohickie at 6:41 PM on February 2, 2005


"So if CNN decides to put a story on their front page, now it's not good for metafilter?"

Yes. It's on the front page of CNN. It's not a "find". If it's on the front page of CNN, it's probably featured prominantly elsewhere so you're not likely to be bringing it to the attention of people who haven't seen it...except for those that want their news from MeFi which I'll go along with if I can get my porn and movie downloads from MeFi, too. Meaning: that's not what MetaFilter is for.

That there is constant confusion on these matters is because of this, from effugas, responsible for one of the posts:

"Just because it's on CNN or in the news doesn't make it unworthy of discussion."

Posts are not for the sake of disussion. Discussion is secondary, not primary. Primary is good links.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:10 PM on February 2, 2005


What a stupid callout.
posted by bingo at 8:18 PM on February 2, 2005


I guess some people just prefer whine to coffee.
posted by Robot Johnny at 8:21 PM on February 2, 2005


"... FPP worthy, or being newsfilter or fill-in-the-blank-filter, etc..."

This is going to be a stupid question but I'm going to ask because I honestly "don't get it."

When someone says "InsertSomethingHereFilter" what do they mean? I'm not sure I fully understand this terminology to what it fully means.

Since I'm a ditz, could someone put it in layman's terms?
posted by Hands of Manos at 9:04 PM on February 2, 2005


it's shorthand and gives the topic immediately--i find it really useful for AskMe questions, but use it for GossipFilter (for one example) also.

also: PepsiBlueFilter denotes a commercial post (that sometimes could be mistaken for a plug), and NewsFilter is for a link to a widely-seen and talked-about topic usually.
posted by amberglow at 9:26 PM on February 2, 2005


"InsertSomethingHereFilter", when used in callouts, can also mean "I don't like this subject so therefore you should all just quit talking about it". Usually used in conjunction with "axe-grinding".
posted by pikachulolita at 11:25 PM on February 2, 2005


As many 'newsfilter' posts link to U.S. news sites, which I don't review, being based in the UK, it's possible to miss funny or interesting stories. But yes, it would be nice to have supplementary links given with the original post.
posted by tommyc at 7:20 AM on February 3, 2005


This is the same old philosophical argument we always have: do we go looking for stuff to bring here to discuss or do we post things we have stumbled upon that we think others might not have seen?
There are people who seem to think that if it's on Drudge, it must be posted here for discussion. That drives me nuts, though when big news breaks, I irritate my own self by often enjoying the extra links and perspective Mefi brings to it.

And what the chicken said.
posted by CunningLinguist at 7:24 AM on February 3, 2005


The biggest reason that you've found quality here, and kept coming back, is because other people cared enough to make an effort to bring poor posts to Metatalk to engage the community in discussion about what makes Metafilter worthwhile.

I was pretty sure that this would immediately come back in response to what I said. I nearly preemptively responded to it in my comment. I realize the value of the self-policing. And I understand that it's a trade off. The balance seems to be a bit off sometimes though. I'd rather see the occasional post on the FPP that didn't interest me and that I could easily skip, than the half dozen comments in MANY of the posts I do want to read complaining about how it isn't appropriate, often amid interesting discussion. Just because something is headline news, or posted on every other blog on the net, doesn't mean that an intelligent discussion of it on Metafilter wouldn't be worthwhile. And besides, I don't check every other blog on the net. I read very few of them. And if possible, I'd prefer to get most of my headline news here too. ;)

You're welcome.
Thank you. Sincerely.
posted by gummo at 9:16 AM on February 3, 2005


Was it intentional to put the link to the coffee story in the word 'Filter'? Because if it was I declare you clever.

I wish I were that clever. Truth is, that didn't occur to me until I read your comment.

Just because it's on CNN or in the news doesn't make it unworthy of discussion.

The Bible is also worthy of discussion: love it or hate it, it has a huge influence on our world. Would a post consisting of a single link to the text of the King James Bible be appropriate?

I'd rather see the occasional post on the FPP that didn't interest me and that I could easily skip, than the half dozen comments in MANY of the posts I do want to read complaining about how it isn't appropriate, often amid interesting discussion.

Oh, I'll agree with you there, which is why I'm strongly of the opinion that the worthiness of a post should be discussed only in MeTa, and not in the post itself.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 10:57 AM on February 3, 2005



The Bible is also worthy of discussion: love it or hate it, it has a huge influence on our world. Would a post consisting of a single link to the text of the King James Bible be appropriate?


I only recently learned about the whole Pi=3 quote in the bible, and...uh...I think I learned about it here.

I'd actually like to see some posting guidelines, specifically something like "METAFILTER IS ABOUT LINKS, WE DONT CARE ABOUT DISCUSSION AROUND HERE".
posted by effugas at 4:19 PM on February 3, 2005


That wouldn't be posted because it's not true. Metafilter does care about discussion. It's just that discussion is a characteristic of mefi, not the point of mefi. The links are the point.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 6:00 PM on February 3, 2005


What EB said. No one in this thread has claimed that discussion is irrelevant to MeFi. Only that it's secondary to the links.

I only recently learned about the whole Pi=3 quote in the bible, and...uh...I think I learned about it here.

And you've neatly avoided answering the question I posed.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 9:50 PM on February 3, 2005


« Older a way to replace the SG revenue   |   Matt, I'm not trying to be irritating here Newer »

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