778 posts tagged with policy.
Displaying 751 through 778 of 778. Subscribe:
Not needing to respond to every post
"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...
Fes' Fece Flingin
Fes' Fece Flingin
Could we please end the Kottke linking?
Could we please end the Kottke linking?
Should we run ads?
Okay, we've discussed it before, but now having looked at the stats for the last couple of months, ADs are a real possibility. Last I checked the average AD payout was $1 ever 1000 page views. Now, with MeFi getting over 5,000,000 a month, that's $5000 a month in revenue. That could keep Matt happy all year round and MeFi up for life. Comments?
crapping on other members has become acceptable
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.
This post is practically a double
It's posts like this one that really disappoint me. Talk about previously covered territory -- every element of that post has been discussed here at one point or another. If it's an important topic that needs more discussion, could we at least wait until there is some new development that gives a proper excuse for bringing it up? Alternately, I'll just shut up and we can all go back to flogging the dead horse.
Growth and its discontents
Is MeFi getting too big?
What if Matt froze users at 10,000?
What if Matt freezed users at 10k? Would it help calm things down a bit?
Are links to outside discussions okay?
What is the MeFi policy on brining up detailed discussions from other communities? This thread points to another thread at Freshmeat and asks the same questions that the Freshmeat community already had answered.
is self promotion always wrong?
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?
'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?
waiting period increases on handguns^H^H^H posts
It was mentioned on another thread that the waiting period to post is now one week (up from 24 hours). This is a very good idea.
As further "crowd control safety" measures, perhaps some mechanism could be developed whereby membership had to be confirmed after one week (in some window of time)? This way, the most casually curious would not be able to post, and would not go into the membership figure total.
In addition, how about some period (6 months?) after which membership would expire?
These features might keep a certain minimal level of seriousness to members and their posts; also, it would be fun to see the "tote board" go down as well as up!
As further "crowd control safety" measures, perhaps some mechanism could be developed whereby membership had to be confirmed after one week (in some window of time)? This way, the most casually curious would not be able to post, and would not go into the membership figure total.
In addition, how about some period (6 months?) after which membership would expire?
These features might keep a certain minimal level of seriousness to members and their posts; also, it would be fun to see the "tote board" go down as well as up!
Edit posts pony
just wondering.... any way we could get a way to edit our own posts? ... i know there is a preview , but hey, mistakes happen
I found this on my blog, which you should read
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?
Will email (and authentication) help keep things more civil?
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?
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?
we should limit posts!
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...
Article too old
Criminy ... can we at least confine our periodical links to stories published this century?
should language be group-regulated?
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?
OK to post stories from plastic.com?
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?
Lincoln told no yo momma jokes against Douglass
"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.
We disagree about double posts
enough with the smug MEFI reverse posting, already! We're all very proud that you're such a dedicated metafilter reader, but so what if someone starts a new thread about an old topic, especially if the thrust of the post is different?!
posted by crunchland at such-and-such a time on January 27
Well there seems to be a problem with to much noise around here and with the new sort feature (upper right hand corner of the home page) there really is little need to post a new topic.
Yes, this should be in MetaTalk but no one ever goes there.
posted by Mick at 5:57 AM PST on January 27
The topic is not old. The specific link came up like a week ago. Most all that was said was said about 'IT', maybe wait until something new comes out? If that jaguar/baylink post was inappropriate, this certainly is too.
posted by tiaka at 7:43 AM PST on January 27
crunchland wrote: enough with the smug MEFI reverse posting, already! We're all very proud that you're such a dedicated metafilter reader, but so what if someone starts a new thread about an old topic, especially if the thrust of the post is different?!
You could not be more wrong on this, crunch. It is everybody's responsibility to do a MeFi search for a link before posting it to the front page. This is a "self-policing" community, in case you did not know that, and the people (like myself) who point out when people make mistakes like redundant posts to the front page are merely doing their duty as MeFi citizens, not being smug or trying to impress anyone with how carefully they read this site. This message needs to go out to everybody, but Mick is right that the conversation would be better held in metaTalk.
posted by ericost at 8:07 AM PST on January 27
posted by crunchland at such-and-such a time on January 27
Well there seems to be a problem with to much noise around here and with the new sort feature (upper right hand corner of the home page) there really is little need to post a new topic.
Yes, this should be in MetaTalk but no one ever goes there.
posted by Mick at 5:57 AM PST on January 27
The topic is not old. The specific link came up like a week ago. Most all that was said was said about 'IT', maybe wait until something new comes out? If that jaguar/baylink post was inappropriate, this certainly is too.
posted by tiaka at 7:43 AM PST on January 27
crunchland wrote: enough with the smug MEFI reverse posting, already! We're all very proud that you're such a dedicated metafilter reader, but so what if someone starts a new thread about an old topic, especially if the thrust of the post is different?!
You could not be more wrong on this, crunch. It is everybody's responsibility to do a MeFi search for a link before posting it to the front page. This is a "self-policing" community, in case you did not know that, and the people (like myself) who point out when people make mistakes like redundant posts to the front page are merely doing their duty as MeFi citizens, not being smug or trying to impress anyone with how carefully they read this site. This message needs to go out to everybody, but Mick is right that the conversation would be better held in metaTalk.
posted by ericost at 8:07 AM PST on January 27
Regional Metafilters?
Matt started it when he mentioned the possibility of regional metafilters, but now discussion has spread around the net, particularly to Europe-based webloggers [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7], who are debating European/English metafilters, non-metafilter sites and ideas for added features to metafilter central.
Basically, the current best suggestion that I have heard is based on a conversation between Nikolai Nolan and myself, which I have stuck on plasticbag.org, but which reads as follows:
"I had an incredibly interesting conversation with Nikolai. He started off suggesting that a European Metafilter might get over the language problems by having a place in the preferences for each user where they could specify what languages they would want to see and which ones they would want to post in.
"The main problem for this from my point of view is that it still causes problems about reading about other countries. Would an Italian writing in English really be something that people in Helsinki would be interested in reading, let alone people in the UK? So then it came to us in a blinding flash. Maybe what we need is not more regional metafilters, but a more evolved filtering mechanism on thet metafilter we've already got! With options in the preferences for reading posts filtered according to language and country, then there is no real need for separate metafilters at all.
"You could be an Frenchman, living in the US, interested in reading posts about France and America but only if they are in French. Or an Englishman living in Holland, interested in reading posts about both countries in both English or Dutch. It's just a question of showing or hiding posts. Whether or not it's technically possible of course, is another matter entirely..."
Basically, the current best suggestion that I have heard is based on a conversation between Nikolai Nolan and myself, which I have stuck on plasticbag.org, but which reads as follows:
"I had an incredibly interesting conversation with Nikolai. He started off suggesting that a European Metafilter might get over the language problems by having a place in the preferences for each user where they could specify what languages they would want to see and which ones they would want to post in.
"The main problem for this from my point of view is that it still causes problems about reading about other countries. Would an Italian writing in English really be something that people in Helsinki would be interested in reading, let alone people in the UK? So then it came to us in a blinding flash. Maybe what we need is not more regional metafilters, but a more evolved filtering mechanism on thet metafilter we've already got! With options in the preferences for reading posts filtered according to language and country, then there is no real need for separate metafilters at all.
"You could be an Frenchman, living in the US, interested in reading posts about France and America but only if they are in French. Or an Englishman living in Holland, interested in reading posts about both countries in both English or Dutch. It's just a question of showing or hiding posts. Whether or not it's technically possible of course, is another matter entirely..."
CNN = BOTW?
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?
new tagline for Metafilter
I just thought we should have an open thread on Jason Krannke's new tagline for Metafilter: "your source for political news, stories stolen from Slashdot, weblogger gossip, and links to major news stories that everyone already knows about".
So? If MeFi can save me the trouble of visiting Slashdot, Drudge and CNN.com (plus providing comments on the various topics I can steal to sound smarter in RW conversations), I think it provides a very important service. Maybe not the service mathowie originally intended...
So? If MeFi can save me the trouble of visiting Slashdot, Drudge and CNN.com (plus providing comments on the various topics I can steal to sound smarter in RW conversations), I think it provides a very important service. Maybe not the service mathowie originally intended...
confusion among similar-looking usernames
Back when I was a regular on the #jeopardy IRC channel, I'd occasionally use the nickname a1exbot to cause confusion with alexbot. Oh, it was great fun. But efaper's attempt to create a straw man's troll for efader is less cool.
Probably no way to counter this. Maybe user profiles can have a born-on date like so many bottles of Bud? This way, old-timers can get the cred they deserve (teehee!), and it can be clear whether a username had been generated that morning for immoral purposes.
Probably no way to counter this. Maybe user profiles can have a born-on date like so many bottles of Bud? This way, old-timers can get the cred they deserve (teehee!), and it can be clear whether a username had been generated that morning for immoral purposes.
MeFi post as callout
I think starting a new front-page thread just to call another user out is going too far, especially when said user explicitly asks to take it to e-mail.
Staying on topic
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.
The original micropayment discussion
It looks like affiliate links will be the next no-no that goes in the guidelines. Does anyone have any objections to that?
(I know my original paypal post was straddling/crossing an etiquette line already, but grumblebee's "gimmie $5" post was a bit too much)
(I know my original paypal post was straddling/crossing an etiquette line already, but grumblebee's "gimmie $5" post was a bit too much)
Had those forwarded from my aunt last month.
"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.