Calling someone a rapist on the sole basis of an accusation made to a reporter is wrong -- and could be libelous. The allegation against Girls Gone Wild producer Joe Francis is horrible and contains a lot of persuasive details, but that doesn't mean it's true.
The Pollo Campero discussion is a nice example of members drowning out derailing attempts without resorting to MetaTalk (at least until I fucked it up by bringing it here). Would MetaFilter be better off without an etiquette/policy section in the gray?
A minor nit, but it's misleading to use a false anchor tag in a link, because people will wrongly assume it's legitimate. The Christian Science Monitor did not declare neoconservatives to be their enemies.
The next time someone posts with glee about a criminal being subjected to violent penile colonization, turning the discussion immediately into a referendum on the subject of prison rape (#1 #2), I hope that person has to spend quality pound-in-the-ass time in MetaTalk as rodii's bitch.
Take a trip with me down the Riviera (#1, #2, #3, #4), where no comment is complete without a little vicious personal invective.
If you don't contribute front-page links, you probably haven't seen the post a link page where Matt pleads with users to show some restraint with WTC links. Should he put it in a bigger font?
Let it be resolved that from this point forward, all double post notifications must be handled like you are stoned. Do I hear a second?
Of all the cheap rhetorical tactics employed here, I think my favorite is "you people are sick and this conversation is beneath me, so I'm not participating except to note this fact" (#1, #2, #3, #4).
"Can't you folks simply address an issue and tell us what you think without attacking the poster rather than what has been posted?" A few threads have featured variations on this sentiment, so I figured the subject was worth a longer look here.
Posting a new link to intentionally extend an existing day-old thread is inappopriate.