MetaTalk

Lately, many people have been promoting concepts such as MetaDiscuss, which implicitly attack the concept of discussion on MeFi. But is this what we really want? [More inside.]
posted by Marquis on Nov 6, 2001 - 6 comments

What's the policy on posting while under the influence of alcohol? Drunken posts seem to have increased dramatically since September 11. I'm all in favour - it makes for great silliness and sincerity - but wonder if sober members find it as funny as I do. (Please don't flame; I paid yesterday!)
posted by MiguelCardoso on Oct 30, 2001 - 42 comments

What's the world view here on posting links to articles that are on a site that requires a paid subscription? Every once in a while, the Wall Street Journal publishes some interesting articles with a unique insight not quite duplicated on a non-subscription site. I'm just trying to avoid a wrist slap here and I couldn't find any threads concerning this using the search function.
posted by billman on Oct 25, 2001 - 3 comments

Aiiee! Make it stop! Yet another e-mail spam harvester posted for "discussion". These are generally tiresome and dangerously close to content-free sites that some schlub whipped up between smoke breaks -- the web equivalent of trolls. They're built with a content management system that automatically begs people to send it to friends, thereby collecting the e-mail addresses. And they don't belong on Metafilter. Or has Metafilter changed that much?
posted by dhartung on Oct 7, 2001 - 10 comments

I noticed an odd trend recently in the way a couple new people were posting and I think I've uncovered a problem. (more)
posted by mathowie on Oct 1, 2001 - 97 comments

is a post that includes a link previously posted in a thread, but not on the homepage, a double-post?
posted by o2b on Sep 25, 2001 - 30 comments

The One World Ribbon Project. Is this a temporary and necessary relaxing of the rule against self-linking? Or does it set a bad precedent?
posted by gd779 on Sep 16, 2001 - 10 comments

Could we have a moratorium on Ananova links for now? While other news sources have not been dead on, they seem to be way off base more than others. There are quite a few reading Mefi right now, and disinfo from what looks like a credible source could hurt.
posted by owillis on Sep 13, 2001 - 5 comments

If something can't be found on the web (private bbs, email meme etc.), is it appropriate to upload it to your own site, clearly label it as not yours and then link to it on metafilter? What if there is an original website, but it's bogged down? Is alright with certain media types (a video clip), but not ok with other stuff (a list of funny things kids have said, which would be a crap post anyway)?
posted by alana on Jul 19, 2001 - 6 comments

should linking to another site be contingent on that user's permission? this question is an old one, mostly debated on slashdot regarding linking to DeCSS sites being ruled illegal. many said that was an impingement of their 1st amendment rights. as a site that relies on linking to other websites, i think it's a relevant issue.

i never read many of the comments on slashdot about the subject because there were so many, and perhaps this has already been debated here by others. but the notion of a site being "slashdotted" came to mind. the costs of bandwidth are, to me, a perfectly legit reason to sue another site over being unknowingly linked to or at least linked without prior approval. so what do you guys think?

i know that mefi is not the sort of site where you can expect a gigabyte's worth of bandwidth to come from one link here, but i think it's a problem that may need to be addressed. has anyone ever been slashdotted here? how much have you had to pay? if you could, would you want to sue to recouperate the costs of being slashdotted?
posted by moz on Jun 26, 2001 - 6 comments

How about a Statute of Limitations on double-posts? jpoulos just posted a link that turns out to be a double-post from something from April 2000. Sure, he should have done the search, but is there a point where something has slipped out of our collective conscious long enough that it can be seen afresh?
posted by briank on Jun 22, 2001 - 12 comments

"Your Usenettish respond-to-everyone-who-disagrees-with-you style might be less effective than you think." 11 out of 49 comments were posted by one user. Is there a proper way to "debate"? Should one save up all retorts and include them in one or two comment posts? Or is it okay to respond to each person individually? I personally am getting tired of it...
posted by jennak on Jun 13, 2001 - 21 comments

Could we please end the Kottke linking?
posted by owillis on Jun 12, 2001 - 20 comments

In my opinion, following members around in order to flame them and personal attacks have no place in Metafilter. I get the impression from the bile spewn at both long-term members (like aaron) and newbies (like redgie) that crapping on other members has become acceptible.
posted by Avogadro on May 31, 2001 - 35 comments

Don't hate me cause I'm a liberal on self-post. but is self promotion always wrong? If the community is made up of intellegent and creative people, won't they have serve the community just as well by posting a self-created link. i admit to my short time in the community, but i sometimes the sacred laws have to be questioned from time to time, and newcomers are probably best in a position to do it.

'allowing self-posts will lead to a community of links to banner ad-driven websites' you say?
OK, no self-posting to a site with banner ads.

And,
what about allowing self-posting only where the author discloses it in the post?

posted by brucec on May 11, 2001 - 23 comments

While arguably all good posts, radio_mookie has posted 6 links in the last three days, while only having 4 comments, and all of the links seem to be cut and paste from his weblog... Does this fall under using the front page as your own blog with Metafilter being your commenting system?
posted by Neb on Apr 5, 2001 - 39 comments

Couldn't find the earlier mention of this, so I'll pick up on it here.

A new user user (RightWinger) just posted a fairly feeble defense of Dubya and was almost immediately called a troll for his pains. I think this is basically because he didn't have an email address. Rogers has mentioned lately, rightly I think, how many potential conflicts can be defused that way, and now I think people are starting to see the lack of email as prima facie evidence of bad faith, and responding accordingly. His post wasn't really that inflammatory, but I think the level of trust is really low for people who can't be contacted offline. Total anonymity and community membership just may not mesh very well.

Matt has floated the idea of making everyone email-authenticable (word?). I think it's a good idea: people will trust more when they see a "real" identity, more offline diplomacy can happen, and I think people will be more responsible if they have a little bit of accountability built in. If it's *that* important to them to be anonymous, why are they posting to MetaFilter?
posted by rodii on Mar 19, 2001 - 62 comments

I'm pretty new around here, and for the most part, I think metafilter is great, but the signal to noise ratio is lower than it might be. I have an idea...
posted by anapestic on Mar 14, 2001 - 39 comments

Criminy ... can we at least confine our periodical links to stories published this century?
posted by rcade on Mar 8, 2001 - 25 comments

I looked in the guidelines, but found no general direction on language. SKOT's comment on the Reparations Thread is what precipitated this question. I'd like some feedback/discussion on what is or is not appropriate language... should language be group-regulated, or should there be some direction from Matt on this? Either way, what should we expect from posters?
posted by silusGROK on Mar 7, 2001 - 24 comments

Directly arising from a thread that I posted on Metafilter about the pill and its effect on mate choice, another question arrives inexorably - I found the article in question via Plastic.com - which as we all know is the 'Metafilter it's not OK to like'. I suppose this is an issue of etiquette or policy - is it appropriate to post stories for discussion here which have already been covered there?
posted by barbelith on Feb 27, 2001 - 8 comments

"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.
posted by rcade on Feb 14, 2001 - 23 comments

I'm just wondering if there should be something more explicit in the guidelines about posting stories from CNN et al. There seems to be some amount of consensus here that this kind of news can be found lots of places on the web and shouldn't be posted on MeFi. What to do?
posted by raku on Oct 12, 2000 - 17 comments

Okay here goes nothing. This one's about topic drift, and what is the proper way of handling it, if there is such a thing.
posted by ZachsMind on Jul 8, 2000 - 8 comments

"So," I clear my throat and hike up my pants, "how bout them last two metafilter links?" Dihydrogen monoxide and an Onion article. Gee whiz.
posted by EngineBeak on Apr 8, 2000 - 1 comment