Skip

how could I not?
January 4, 2004 6:32 AM   Subscribe

Britney's marriage anulled And here I'd guessed 6 days.
posted by delmoi (22 comments total)

 
Good. Now I can marry her. Hooray!
posted by mokey at 6:39 AM on January 4, 2004


As seen on Metafilter, one entry down.
posted by Nelson at 6:48 AM on January 4, 2004


Worst. Double post. Ever.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 6:49 AM on January 4, 2004


Meta FarkFilter
posted by arha at 6:51 AM on January 4, 2004


I second that. Nothing new in it, except a longer list of celebs who went to the chapel.

I predict this post will be gone in 6 hours...
posted by Busithoth at 6:52 AM on January 4, 2004


I think the idea might be that that was the marriage post and this is the annulment post. Not that the link says anything to the effect that the marriage has been annulled. This has been happening quite a bit lately. Are people just guessing the content instead of reading, or are they reading and not understanding the content?
posted by nthdegx at 6:53 AM on January 4, 2004


But the marriage was a joke that went too far, celebrity news web site People.com says, and is already in the process of being annulled.

That was the second paragraph on the BBC page.
posted by delmoi at 7:02 AM on January 4, 2004


My first deleted FPP ever was about Britney. This brings back memories.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 7:03 AM on January 4, 2004


Delmoi, the first posted article contained the same reference, and in fact, a careful reading indicates that the BBC was using the first posted article as it's source. Did you really think this warranted a new thread?
posted by monju_bosatsu at 7:08 AM on January 4, 2004


Next thing you know, we'll have:

1) Posters cutting and pasting the whole damn article, or

2) Readers asking for a bit torrent of the thread, in case LoFiMeFi goes down.
posted by Smart Dalek at 7:12 AM on January 4, 2004


hmm...
posted by delmoi at 7:17 AM on January 4, 2004


Delmoi, you know that reporting that something is in the process of being done is very different to reporting that the process is complete when in fact it hasn't.

Weapons of Mass Destruction found in Iraq! versus: The Search for Weapons of Mass Destruction continues in Iraq. See?
posted by nthdegx at 7:19 AM on January 4, 2004


hasn't isn't
posted by nthdegx at 7:19 AM on January 4, 2004


nthdegx: see, now we're getting all epistemological. People weren’t saying “Weapons of mass destruction are in the process of being found.” There’s a difference. Generally when you say something is in the process of something else, that means that the process will complete. When I say “Iraq is in the process of being searched for Weapons of mass Destruction” then eventually the search will be done, weapons or no.

Also, the initial people magazine story I read did not mention the annulment. That was probably added later.
posted by delmoi at 7:36 AM on January 4, 2004


the pro-chastity movement in the United States.

How come I never get these memos?
posted by jerseygirl at 7:58 AM on January 4, 2004


Delmoi, whether or not the original article mentioned annulment or not at the time you read it, this absolutely did not need another front page post immediately following the original. There are occasionally debatable circumstances where a new post might be appropriate rather than an update in the existing thread. This is not one of them.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 8:26 AM on January 4, 2004


Also, the initial people magazine story I read did not mention the annulment. That was probably added later.

To kick that rotting horse carcass, I think the title of the previous post is referring to the annulment when it mentions Rodman. He was going to get his union annulled as well. (which is, I suppose, the only way for a celebrity to REALLY slap their ex in the face)
posted by Busithoth at 9:06 AM on January 4, 2004


I was going to complain that the previous article was still up, now the stakes have been raised it would appear.

Respect to delmoi for showing his face after this one, but honestly, just stick your tail between your legs and run off for a while until we forget, it happens to the best of us.
posted by Space Coyote at 10:07 AM on January 4, 2004


I want this topic annuled please...
posted by madman at 11:02 AM on January 4, 2004


Generally when you say something is in the process of something else, that means that the process will complete. When I say “Iraq is in the process of being searched for Weapons of mass Destruction” then eventually the search will be done, weapons or no.

Nitpicking. You reported something as having taken place when in fact it hasn't happened yet. If metafilter must play newsfilter from time to time, can we at least make the news accurate?
posted by nthdegx at 11:15 AM on January 4, 2004




I knew he'd get lucky one day...
posted by dash_slot- at 4:15 PM on January 4, 2004


How ironic delmoi.

For once I agree. A waste of time.
posted by bluedaniel at 11:40 PM on January 5, 2004


« Older dennis rodman pub stunt?   |   FOLLOW UP: Laptop Steering Wheel Mount Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post