Any hope of making "crush" work again? February 14, 2005 8:12 AM Subscribe
Happy Valentine's Day! Any hope of making "crush" work again? No response from Matt here or here, nor to my email a couple days ago. Is this feature disabled for a reason?
Any chance of implementing the xfn 1.1 relationships
posted by timeistight at 8:51 AM on February 14, 2005
contact, kin and me? me would be good for sock puppets.posted by timeistight at 8:51 AM on February 14, 2005
sure timeistight, I can update it later today.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:20 AM on February 14, 2005
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:20 AM on February 14, 2005
Thanks, Matt. You're really on a roll these days.
posted by timeistight at 9:54 AM on February 14, 2005
posted by timeistight at 9:54 AM on February 14, 2005
Metafilter: Me would be good for sock puppets.
posted by eddydamascene at 10:14 AM on February 14, 2005
posted by eddydamascene at 10:14 AM on February 14, 2005
Hold on here. "Crush" means the romantic kind? I thought it meant the other kind...
posted by arto at 11:45 AM on February 14, 2005
posted by arto at 11:45 AM on February 14, 2005
Ok, in the spirit of the day and all, I am moved here to say this: I ♥ ♥ ♥ mathowie. Thanks for Metafilter and the stable of new ponies you've added to it, Matt.
posted by Lynsey at 3:38 PM on February 14, 2005
posted by Lynsey at 3:38 PM on February 14, 2005
>me would be good for sock puppets.
>>sure timeistight, I can update it later today.
Hasn't Matt gone on record saying that sockpuppets are destructive to the fundamental underpinnings of identity-based online community?
Or was that me?
Don't want to sound like rushmc here, but. Point of order?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:40 PM on February 14, 2005
>>sure timeistight, I can update it later today.
Hasn't Matt gone on record saying that sockpuppets are destructive to the fundamental underpinnings of identity-based online community?
Or was that me?
Don't want to sound like rushmc here, but. Point of order?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:40 PM on February 14, 2005
"identity-based online community"
Apologies, Mr. STW Chicken. All this time I thought stavros was a nick not your real identity. ;-)
posted by Cranberry at 3:56 PM on February 14, 2005
Apologies, Mr. STW Chicken. All this time I thought stavros was a nick not your real identity. ;-)
posted by Cranberry at 3:56 PM on February 14, 2005
sockpuppets are destructive to the fundamental underpinnings of identity-based online community
And a 'rel="me"' link between my accounts will restore those very underpinings. It's a good thing.
Besides, each new sock puppet puts anothers $5USD in mathowie's baby shoe fund.
posted by timeistight at 3:59 PM on February 14, 2005
And a 'rel="me"' link between my accounts will restore those very underpinings. It's a good thing.
Besides, each new sock puppet puts anothers $5USD in mathowie's baby shoe fund.
posted by timeistight at 3:59 PM on February 14, 2005
And a 'rel="me"' link between my accounts will restore those very underpinings. It's a good thing.
Only if someone cares to look it up. No, sir, I don't like it.
Besides, each new sock puppet puts anothers $5USD in mathowie's baby shoe fund.
This, however, is true. Hmm.
All this time I thought stavros was a nick not your real identity.
My shorthand was unclear, but was referring to past discussions about this. When all we really have to go on (other than for regulars of offsite spawn like #mefi, for better or worse) is what people have said here in the past and the way they've said it, and those words are unalterable (other than by deletion), it builds up an identity attached to the username. Unless, as some have claimed to be, one is living in an eternal alzheimersesque present with regard to participation here, our interactions are coloured by our knowledge of that posting history. It's a fundamental. That's what my shorthand 'identity-based' was referring to, clumsily.
Sockpuppets undermine that.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:44 PM on February 14, 2005
Only if someone cares to look it up. No, sir, I don't like it.
Besides, each new sock puppet puts anothers $5USD in mathowie's baby shoe fund.
This, however, is true. Hmm.
All this time I thought stavros was a nick not your real identity.
My shorthand was unclear, but was referring to past discussions about this. When all we really have to go on (other than for regulars of offsite spawn like #mefi, for better or worse) is what people have said here in the past and the way they've said it, and those words are unalterable (other than by deletion), it builds up an identity attached to the username. Unless, as some have claimed to be, one is living in an eternal alzheimersesque present with regard to participation here, our interactions are coloured by our knowledge of that posting history. It's a fundamental. That's what my shorthand 'identity-based' was referring to, clumsily.
Sockpuppets undermine that.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:44 PM on February 14, 2005
Yaaaaaaaay, Matt, thanks for fixing the crush feature!! You are my valentine.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 8:49 PM on February 14, 2005 [1 favorite]
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 8:49 PM on February 14, 2005 [1 favorite]
It must still not be working. All my crushes are from males, which means something's wrong. Possibly with me.
posted by jonmc at 9:14 PM on February 14, 2005
posted by jonmc at 9:14 PM on February 14, 2005
Well, what a limited font! THat question mark is supposed to be "does not equal"!
posted by Cranberry at 9:40 PM on February 14, 2005
posted by Cranberry at 9:40 PM on February 14, 2005
Whah thank yah, Cranberry. You ah too kind.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 1:17 AM on February 15, 2005
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 1:17 AM on February 15, 2005
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
Yes, because no one loves you. Sorry, daddy's been drinking for breakfast again.
I'll fix it.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 8:27 AM on February 14, 2005