Join 3,512 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


censorship
February 27, 2000 3:27 PM   Subscribe

censorship hmm.. one of my posts seems to have disappeared... are you censoring this weblog?
posted by efader (22 comments total)

 
Yeah, I did remove it, because the post wasn't a link to somewhere else, didn't disscuss anything interesting that happened, and went against the nature of this site.

I thought the point and mission of this site was pretty straightforward: find interesting stuff on the web and post it. Discuss afterwards.

You posted a general question to the other users of the site, without a link going anywhere. This isn't a mailing list. That type of post goes against what this place was designed for.

I'll also add that this post asking about censorship is not what I'd call acceptable at all, and would prefer it if it were sent to me personally as an email.

I'm working on a redesign of this site, and among the changes will be a metafilter-centric discussion area where people can raise issues about content, make feature requests, and point out bugs.

- Matt
posted by mathowie at 3:35 PM on February 27, 2000 [1 favorite]


Sorry, my finger slipped. (By the way, you should consider blocking blank posts!) Anyway, I was just going to chime in that censorship is the Discussion topic this year in Speech. Not that this issue really has much to do with censorship. . . .
posted by gleemax at 4:15 PM on February 27, 2000


ok somewhat makes sense... but the point of the removed post was to create a discussion just like this...

why can't something happen here (at metafilter) rather than have to happen somewhere else and then talked about or linked to from metafilter?


posted by efader at 5:18 PM on February 27, 2000


> why can't something happen here (at metafilter) rather than have to happen somewhere else and then talked about or linked to from metafilter?

a valid question.

one, I will point out, that matt gets to decide. it's his site. if he says that we all have stand on our heads naked while we post, then that's the way it is.

RB
posted by rebeccablood at 5:27 PM on February 27, 2000


and two, he just finished saying that he was including a meta-metafilter discussion area in his next redesign.
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 5:32 PM on February 27, 2000


HTH.
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 5:33 PM on February 27, 2000


it's his site. if he says that we all have stand on our heads naked while we post, then that's the way it is.

Er, what do you mean "if"? Didn't he already say that? No? Ah, bloody heck...where are my pants?
posted by bradlands at 5:37 PM on February 27, 2000 [1 favorite]


Well, MetaFilter (and weblogs in general) exist to talk about timely items in the world, as opposed to items that were created "in-house". It's a narrow focus, but I think it works for all intents and purposes.

I'd like to continue seeing items pointing to interesting news, issues, or general wackiness, with discussion following. Discussion for discussion's sake would get tired real quick. Many people visit here each day, follow the links, read the commentary, and may or may not read the discussion threads (because they're an extra link away, they force the user to want to follow it). So if there were 5 link-free discussion threads, people not going into the thread would derive no benefit from reading the discussion starter.

That's why I alluded to a mailing list. Those, and bulletin boards like them, exist solely for discussions of various topics. There's hundreds of thousands of them on the web, and they're designed exclusively for discussion.

The main purpose of this site (and again, many other weblogs in general) is to point out interesting things "out there" in a timely manner. Discussion about the interesting things posted is just gravy.

If you want to know my short term plans for this site, it's to:

a) clean up a dozen or so bugs, and add a couple minor features
b) create a metafilter-specific discussion area to foster the continued improvement of this place
c) redesign the site to better handle growth in terms of # of posts and # of extra features. Last week I banged out a couple mockups, here's one and another. They have major flaws, and they're just first attempts at doing navigation on the side.

My longer term goals are to possibly start a web-based design and programming forum, where people can ask web design questions others can answer them, and everyone can search the archives for previous answers. I have some other long term ideas, but I'll leave them for another day.

Oh, and although posting naked while standing on one's head is not necessarily required by this site, it's greatly encouraged.
posted by mathowie at 5:55 PM on February 27, 2000


> why can't something happen here (at metafilter)
> rather than have to happen somewhere else and
> then talked about or linked to from metafilter?

If you take a look at how Slashdot has grown, they started out covering outside topics and sites and have added several in-house things like Slashdot Radio, the Your Rights Online stuff, and the Ask Slashdot feature.

I think a redesigned metafilter can expand in a similar fashion, and extra features will soon follow.

posted by mathowie at 6:08 PM on February 27, 2000


Powder blue websites make the baby jesus cry.

It's not that I have a problem with change, I don't. I love it. I just... aw heck. I'm gonna miss this color scheme.
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 7:38 PM on February 27, 2000


The only horrible thing about the light blue was how much it interfered with trying to read white text and links. Although I too enjoy the current color scheme immensely, and feel it could stay around for a very long time without getting old.

Just my two . . . um . . . uh . . . completely un-money-related sentences!
posted by gleemax at 7:54 PM on February 27, 2000


"White text and links," was supposed to be, "light text and links," sorry.
posted by gleemax at 7:57 PM on February 27, 2000


oh yeah, that light blue page was just a poorly thought out design choice. The next redesign won't be light blue, don't worry.
posted by mathowie at 8:16 PM on February 27, 2000


I like the header bit Matt, but I gotta say the light blue/light text made my eyes water after about 2 secs. Then again, I wasn't fond of the yellow design at all. However, I'm a picky bastard who likes minimilism.

What about black on white with no graphics... fast, neh?
posted by Neale at 8:50 PM on February 27, 2000


I'll vote for the current design, as per placement of elements, general navigation, clarity... hard to improve. And keep the current logo or something close to it... but you can lose the "it's your whatever..." tagline. And as for color, when I see a blue background, a little voice in the back of my head starts singng "Da Ba Dee, Da Ba Die", until I have to stab myself in the ear with a salad fork. Just one of 492 member opinions... I'm sure some of you would use a soup spoon.
posted by wendell at 11:30 PM on February 27, 2000


I love ######ship! Hey, if Matt wants to implement ######ing on his site, then by all means he should ###### away!
posted by dangerman at 10:59 AM on February 28, 2000


I tried to find whoever posted that last message, but there was a big blue dot of his URL, and since the background color was blue........ uh, oh, here it comes again... Da Ba Dee, Da Ba Die, Da Ba Dee, Da Ba Die...
posted by wendell at 11:14 AM on February 28, 2000


wendell, do you want my cd single of that song, cause I hate it and shouldn't have bought it...

posted by prolific at 3:38 PM on February 28, 2000


Didn't say I like it, I just can't get it out of my congested head, like a 21st Century version of the Gilligan's Island theme... oh nooooo.... a three ho-ur tooour...
posted by wendell at 5:18 PM on February 28, 2000


Da Ba Dee, Da Ba Die, Da Ba Dee, Da Ba Die, Da Ba Dee, Da Ba Die...
well that's just frickin great...
Da Ba Dee, Da Ba Die, Da Ba Dee, Da Ba Die, Da Ba Dee, Da Ba Die...
posted by Neale at 9:18 PM on February 29, 2000


I haven't heard this song, so apparently it won't find purchase in my head. That's good, I think.

Blue version: The light blue hurts, but I like the top and the metronome.

Yellow version: I like, but damn that's yellow.

Let's do the redesign again... (it's just a click to the left... and then a link to the righ-igh-igh-igh-igh-ight.)
posted by jason at 9:51 AM on March 2, 2000


is this thing on?
posted by mathowie at 12:14 AM on June 8, 2000


« Older Slashdot has...  |  Carl's synopsis of his thought... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments