I’m here to propose that we pursue a season of fun and non-controversial posts on MetaFilter. Let’s fill up the Blue with the interesting, the comedic, the curious, the lengthy disclosure… the topics which are posted to share something groovy and/or interesting and not posted to stir up the grar. [more inside]
Several posts to this New York Times "open letter" from Dylan Farrow about being a survivor of abuse have been deleted     on the basis that there's an open post about Mia Farrow, this is outragefilter, and that it's a touchy topic that we've "covered a lot recently". These are not convincing arguments for the deletions. [more inside]
PONY: Applying the same higher standard to FPPs about "the crisis in academia" as the one that's applied to other outragefilter FPPs? They come up regularly, they turn into trainwrecks. In fact, they always turn into the same trainwreck. I realize that these FPPs are not quite "newsfilter" and sometimes seem substantive, but experience shows that they never lead to respectful discussion, just acrimony and meticulous, systematic trolling.
I'd like to know the reasoning behind keeping some posts up while deleting others, especially as it pertains to these particular threads. [more inside]
This is a lousy post and should be deleted. It's outrage filter and we don't have both sides of the story. Some of the links in the thread indicate that the blogger does not have a history of reliable behavior, so they may be nothing to be outraged about. I think it's bad policy to accept something apparently outrageous prima facie without delving into it further. If you can't find clarifying links, then don't post.
So we're Outragefilter now? Or are we going with "but there's people giving PayPal alternatives which makes it barely legitimate" on this one? I only ask because I also have some doozies from reddit ready to go.
I propose we make a new time slot between Friday evening and Saturday morning called GRARing hour. [more inside]
What is "outragefilter"? How do we tell? [more inside]