Join 3,425 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


online reality games go straight to the gutter
September 21, 2001 1:59 PM   Subscribe

online reality games go straight to the gutter first survivorer, then survivorblog, then survivorblog 2, then survivorcam, then survivorer 2, then puppetmaster... now another incarnation of survivorcam. how much more can we take? flame me now. kthx.
posted by notoriousbhc (140 comments total) 6 users marked this as a favorite

 
i think, as will, winner of bigbrother2 said ever-so eloquently last night:

"if you can't take reality based tv then you can't take reality which means you have a problem living in reality which means you have problems."

kthxbi~~*!!
posted by marissatomic at 2:08 PM on September 21, 2001 [2 favorites]


If you think "Reality TV" is Reality... I think you have bigger problems.
posted by mkn at 2:17 PM on September 21, 2001 [1 favorite]


I don't see the big problem, haha. we at survivorcam2 KNOW we are obnoxious and gratuitous; we welcome uninhibited behavior. its all in fun, hence it being called "a game" - its hardly a new concept. why does everything have to be so serious all the time, especially in light of recent tragic events? I'm in the middle of NY and right now I NEED this silly little outlet.

lighten UP, homie.
posted by hunyglazed ham at 2:18 PM on September 21, 2001


like OMG marissa. didn't you like, WIN SURVIVORCAM 1?

web celebrity alert!

~~*squiggly lines are like, so KewLieZ!!*~~

anyone who deconstructs this post or attempts any kind of pseudo-intellectual discussion will be fed to the wolves. entertainment is not frivolous, even frivolous entertainment.

ROCK MOST ON.
posted by survivorcam at 2:27 PM on September 21, 2001


"if you can't take reality based tv then you can't take reality which means you have a problem living in reality which means you have problems."

If you don't like watching sitcoms then you don't like comedy and that means you can't laugh which means you suck.
posted by Laugh_track at 2:28 PM on September 21, 2001 [2 favorites]


If you don't like watching sitcoms then you don't like comedy and that means you can't laugh which means you suck.

you know, that thought train ALMOST left the station, except for the fact that the jump from not liking comedy to the inability to laugh is too broad.

also, my quote should be attributed to william kirby, DO, winner of bigbrother2, not me.

Kthxbi**~~!
posted by marissatomic at 2:38 PM on September 21, 2001


Web Celebrity Alert 2

Oh my god is that the real Huny??
posted by Saima at 2:38 PM on September 21, 2001


I'm just glad we're talking about something else on MetaFilter besides the World Trade Center.
posted by littleyellowdifferent at 2:39 PM on September 21, 2001


[Reality <--> Reality TV] = [weather <--> modern indoor controlled climate]
posted by yesster at 2:40 PM on September 21, 2001


LIKE OMGOMGOMG!!!

that IS the real HUNY YOUNG.

bow down, mortals.
posted by survivorcam at 2:40 PM on September 21, 2001


THE REAL HUNY!
posted by hunyglazed ham at 2:41 PM on September 21, 2001


i'm going to mention the world trade center in this post just so this thread can "fit in" with the rest of the threads in MeFi.

okay here it goes...

WORLD TRADE CENTER!!!!!!!

that is all.
posted by survivorcam at 2:44 PM on September 21, 2001


Oh jesus christ. Who invited the camgirls and gave them accounts?

Like, gag me with a spoon.

kthxbye!
posted by dogmatic at 2:52 PM on September 21, 2001


who exactly are you talking about dogmatic? answer carefully.
posted by hunyglazed ham at 2:55 PM on September 21, 2001


Just to nitpick: I believe it should be "first SURVIVORblog, then Survivorer." If I know my web chronology, anyway.

Oh, and sure, mention Survivorer, but then conveniently forget Survivorerer, its lovably ghetto and simultaneously-running half-cousin. The winner of that got $15 - fifteen whole dollars, cash American! Which almost made up for the painful lack of acclaim that was associated with winning, I'm sure.

While I'm at it, I suppose I should note that Survivorer III is in the works as well....
posted by youhas at 2:55 PM on September 21, 2001


well, that amanda validatethis satan the orca dyke patooty head told me that survivorer came first. someone should get amanda to post here. heh heh heh.

i won survivorBLOG 2.

huny is sexy.

marissa is a whore.

amanda is a dyke.

i think the chicken came before the egg though.

oh can you like, take these comments seriously, pretty please? like OMG!!! [looks at camgirl-lingo notes... uh.... what should i say next? oh yeah...] buy me stuff!@!@1 LOLOLOLOL <3 <3 <3

KTHXKTHXKTHX.
posted by survivorcam at 3:05 PM on September 21, 2001


re: dogmatic (don't feel like waiting for an answer)

gee I heard about some of the snobby souls that inhabit metafilter...did we just find one? coulda sworn this was a community site. I guess not EVERYONE is welcome here underneath it all. sorta like america! hey now.

interesting...the only "camgirl" that posted was marissa. so I assume you were speaking of bertie and/or me. do your research. I'm not a camgirl, neither is bertie. DOH.

KTHXBI (which may I add, was used by marissa as a JOKE. pull the lump of coal out your ass and take it back to a thread that is deserved of your attention oh wise one. *snort*)

:D fiesty ain't I. and sexy too, bertie said so.
posted by hunyglazed ham at 3:06 PM on September 21, 2001 [1 favorite]


And incidentally, Survivorer did come first, but when I set up SURVIVORblog, I had no idea what an e/n site was back in the day, and found the other site in the middle of SBlog.

Or something. Metafilterers versus Camgirls. That would make an awesome episode of "Family Feud."
posted by littleyellowdifferent at 3:09 PM on September 21, 2001


ernie <3 <3 <3
posted by survivorcam at 3:12 PM on September 21, 2001


i'm pretty sure survivorcam is just a front to get girls to send bertie and amanda pictures of their boobies. but that's just my theory.

(*) (*)
posted by lescour at 3:18 PM on September 21, 2001


"i'm pretty sure survivorcam is just a front to get girls to send bertie and amanda pictures of their boobies"

FOR SHAME. what must you think of us? this is a serious game here, be serious!

its actually a front to get girls to send bertie and ME pictures of their boobies. ME. ME ME ME.
posted by hunyglazed ham at 3:22 PM on September 21, 2001


i'm pretty sure survivorcam is just a front to get girls to send bertie and amanda pictures of their boobies. but that's just my theory.

And as long as Bertie and Amanda are a sharin', we ain't a carin'!

<shame>I'm such a pig...<shame>
posted by RevGreg at 3:25 PM on September 21, 2001


Um... Can we have another "What's yer favorite....?" post? That was fun.
posted by Jako at 3:26 PM on September 21, 2001


oh damn huny. sorry to fuck with your shit.

yeah, metafilter is a community site. but last i checked, no one invited yer community to invade ours and fill up a thread posting mindless bs. and it seems like you and marissa signed up to do just that.

and bertie, cool as she is, seems to only talk here when she's being talked about.

i wouldn't mind quite so much if i didn't believe that you and marissa and bertie are going to disappear as soon as this thread does. however, as it seems you have signed up solely for this occasion (and any subsequent mention of survivorblog/cam/1,2,3, 600000...), it's a bit annoying that you've shown up simply to waste what could be an actually satisfying thread about, well, you.

and besides, don't you have your own playground to post stupid shit at each other? isn't that what survivorcam is for?

ps. tho bertie's cam was down before her site disappeared, last i saw yes she did have a cam. and um. so do you.
posted by dogmatic at 3:26 PM on September 21, 2001


heh, I think you all suck as much as nikki webster, thx :D
posted by sammie at 3:37 PM on September 21, 2001


wait, you didn't invite our community to "invade" yours?! then do you expect to link + criticize without a response?

why, i like the way you all do things here. very one sided. i should implicate such tactics onto my domain!

and to say that we're posting "stupid shit" in on this domain, is like calling the kettle black.
posted by sidney at 3:38 PM on September 21, 2001


"no one invited your community to invade ours"

what is "my" community? you don't know a damn thing about me or any communities I may or may not associate with, so take your assumptions elsewhere. "invasion"? OH PLEASE its not that deep, do you always take yourself so seriously? this was done in FUN. besides, I wasn't aware an invitation to post here was needed to register. snob. like I said - if this thread and our comments are below you, as you have very strongly insinuated, go to a different thread.

its just...that...simple.

then again maybe I YET AGAIN misunderstood metafilter and you are OBLIGATED to post in every thread on the site! oops my bad.

I registered to take place in the discussion. apparently my response to what was originally said didn't fit your criteria. honestly, I've never felt the need to register to metafilter before, infact I'd been here MAYBE twice. thats interesting that I'm "invading" now that I've registered to respond to a comment that RELATES TO ME, though. what was I thinking?! I should've registered two weeks ago, then it'd be okay!

I have a cam. I don't have a yahoo club. I don't have "live cam chats". in fact, my cam image isn't even on my main page! so again, who are you calling a camgirl? does the presence of a recent snapshot qualify me as such? I think not.

snob.
posted by hunyglazed ham at 3:41 PM on September 21, 2001


Huny layin the smackdown. ROFLAMOSLALROA *giggle giggle*

Yeah, I wouldn't consider Huny some camgirl. Every chick on the inet who has purchased a cam is a camgirl? I seem to remember a specific time when Huny posted a request on her old cam image, asking that everyone remove her from portals that they put her in without consent. As in, she has not applied to portals and crap to get hits, which is usually all the cam is there for.
posted by linuxkitty at 3:48 PM on September 21, 2001


You see, MeFi people, the E/N & cam worlds are just war grounds, waiting for battles to break. And you all are constantly flaking bits and pieces of shrapnal to those who conduct their activities on "the other side."

Although I'm part of neither the E/N or cam scenes, I'm generally annoyed with your constant blahblahblah about the "communities" that exist. You know, the "communities" that you all are forever turning your noses up at.

But my confusion lies around how MeFi is oh-so-different from, say, internetgossip.net (other than the obvious snob-ish forum you provide).
posted by sidney at 3:51 PM on September 21, 2001


If you showed up to provide an actual discussion, that's one thing. But it seems that the survivorcam horde came here to point at each other, laugh, and acknowledge one another's presence. That could be done on your own sites, no?

Metafilter is a self-policing community. Therefore, when a person or group of people appear out of the wide blue yonder to fill a thread with obnoxious bullshit, we tell them so. Read the guidelines, check the other threads, read MetaTalk. These are all things you can do to become a productive member of our community.

But um, that's not what you're here for, is it?
posted by dogmatic at 3:55 PM on September 21, 2001


damn.. the whole crew is here. and everyone's fighting... and... and.. i still don't know what e/n is.
posted by lotsofno at 3:55 PM on September 21, 2001


i wouldn't mind quite so much if i didn't believe that you and marissa and bertie are going to disappear as soon as this thread does

Going by what I've seen in this thread, if I thought those people were going to stick around and continue contributing, I'd shoot myself.
posted by moss at 3:59 PM on September 21, 2001


e/n = everything/nothing

websites that post random arcticles and any amount of random things (pictures, movies, etc).
posted by sidney at 3:59 PM on September 21, 2001


E/N = Everything/Nothing. Here's the accurate if somewhat long in the tooth History of E/N.

What the genre has evolved into is a whole other matter entirely. But that's a discussion for another time.
posted by youhas at 4:01 PM on September 21, 2001


I was addressing you as an individual, not as part of a "horde", so you could at least address ME as such if you are able.

I don't recall saying any "obnoxious bullshit". but apparently my three word response to saima ("THE REAL HUNY"), someone who DOES seem to be somewhat of a regular poster here, is "obnoxious bullshit" to you. it was a joke. apparently not high brow enough for you and YOUR COMMUNITY WE INVADED, but a joke nonetheless.

you're not contributing to original discussion, however. yet I was. so in the spirit of self-policing: GET OUT OF THIS THREAD. snob.
posted by hunyglazed ham at 4:08 PM on September 21, 2001


So why can't people jsut ignore this stuff if it bores them. I don't find it at all complex to not care about campersons (camp-persons?). Can't we all just get along?
posted by davidgentle at 4:10 PM on September 21, 2001


*spits out what appears to be blood and chunks of human flesh*
Dear GOD, this fetus tastes HORRIBLE!
posted by linuxkitty at 4:11 PM on September 21, 2001


huny:

1 There was no original discussion...The pointing and waving preceded any discussion from members that signed up before the actual post was made.

2 Yes, you contributed to the stupidity. Which is why I responded to you 'as part of the horde'

3 I'll be oh so glad when this thread dies and you go back to your own site to bitch about whether or not nay is dressed and what's on her wish list. good day.
posted by dogmatic at 4:20 PM on September 21, 2001


[ If you don't like watching sitcoms then you don't like comedy and that means you can't laugh which means you suck. ]

you know, that thought train ALMOST left the station, except for the fact that the jump from not liking comedy to the inability to laugh is too broad.


About as broad as the jump from not liking reality based tv to not being able to take reality, wouldn't you think?
posted by adrianhon at 4:25 PM on September 21, 2001


David Gentle: You know, the domain name -is- 'survivorcam.net//.org'. If it's such a problem, or one would think that they would have a problem with an online reality game, well, I'd assume the brilliance that runs Metafilter would conclude from the name, not to go there.

By the way. When I'm browsing E/N-camgirl websites, once in a while they bitch about other sites in thier blog. You know, how much they suck and all this. With this recent blurb on metafilter, I don't see how the authors are above anyone elses' website. They're doing the same thing. And if you don't want our 'element' posting here, then write about something else.

Dogmatic: Are you the same guy that idles on #stile, or is associated somehow with the stileproject?
posted by linuxkitty at 4:27 PM on September 21, 2001


kitty: not at all.
posted by dogmatic at 4:28 PM on September 21, 2001


By the way. When I'm browsing E/N-camgirl websites, once in a while they bitch about other sites in thier blog. You know, how much they suck and all this. With this recent blurb on metafilter, I don't see how the authors are above anyone elses' website. They're doing the same thing. And if you don't want our 'element' posting here, then write about something else.

The problem is not whether or not camgirl sites suck. The issue does not in any way involve the content of your site or bertie's site or huny's site. I wrote what I have because 'your element' came to Metafilter and are making it suck, with comments like this one.
posted by dogmatic at 4:32 PM on September 21, 2001


1. you've displayed nothing in this thread but the ability to be a jackass elitist and shove people into categories they don't necessarily fit into. nay? wishlist? I repeat: you don't know a damn thing about me nor the subject matter I address so get real, babyboy. I'd also invite you to take a look at my site and see what I'm REALLY about, but why bother when your narrow mentality has spoken in volumes?

2. both of my posts which you classified as "bullshit" were DIRECT RESPONSES to already existing metafilter members! I'll bet you missed that one didn't you? LOOK AGAIN, idiot.

3. your the kind of person I'm afraid of in the world. a stereotyping, pigeonholing ignorant fool. good day to you as well.
posted by hunyglazed ham at 4:36 PM on September 21, 2001


Dogmatic: I'm not talking about you dear, I'm talking about the original "survivorcam, and all reality-based games suck" post that appears on the main page. The only thing I have -ever- addressed to you was "are you the same dogmatic that is in #stile or associated with the site".

The internet is filled with sick fucks doggy, and I'm one of them. Deal.
posted by linuxkitty at 4:37 PM on September 21, 2001


Wow. Boobs.

Dorks.
posted by dopamine at 4:39 PM on September 21, 2001


Dogmatic and I went to a rave together last weekend. She took lots of Ecstacy and started to drool. Then I gave her a backrub. Everybody was giving Dogmatic bracelets because she likes them. She told me she loved me and it wasn't just because she was rolling. I gave her a hug and then she tried to kiss me. I didn't mind, so I started to make out with her. I could feel her hip bones grinding into mine, so I had to push her off. She got really mad that I didn't love her, so she stormed off, took some more E and went home with some random guy. Good times, good times.
posted by Cookie from Unlovely at 4:40 PM on September 21, 2001


is that the sort of intelligent discussion advocated here, dopamine! NO! be careful before dogmatic catches you!

lame.
posted by hunyglazed ham at 4:41 PM on September 21, 2001


Dopamine has been a member of metafilter since March. His recent comment "Wow. Boobs. Dorks." is exactly the superior content I'd like bestowed upon my own site. Metafilter members are, ahem, "the kewliest".

Dopamine: I don't mean to offend you at all -- three-worded posts that are meant to be taken lightly don't bother me in the slightest. They do however, bother your elite community, and I was simply pointing out that MF, though ran by uptight snots, are the same as us. Thank you for your post, my appologies if offended.
posted by linuxkitty at 4:46 PM on September 21, 2001


Cam people, I think you're missing dogmatic's point. It's not elitism, it's that this site has a vibe, a way people generally act, and a certain level of intelligent discourse that I've worked hard to maintain for a couple years now.

The thing with this thread is that a bunch of people have shown up and ignored all that.

If you need an analogy, I'm throwing a party, and that party has been going on all night, and everyone's mellow, drinking lightly, talking amongst themselves. Everyone has gotten to know each other and is getting along. Then a group busts in, spills punch on the white carpet, starts yelling across the room to each other while dancing on tables.

dogmatic is just asking you guys to respect that previous history.
posted by mathowie at 4:50 PM on September 21, 2001 [3 favorites]


Linuxkitty: The internet is filled with sick fucks doggy, and I'm one of them. Deal.

Actually, no, it's not a deal. While there are no formal rules or codes of conduct on Metafilter, we tend to try and aim for civilized discussion and debate. It doesn't always happen, but most people try, and rarely do we get such shockingly offensive comments as this one:

*spits out what appears to be blood and chunks of human flesh*
Dear GOD, this fetus tastes HORRIBLE!


We don't have to put up with it, and certainly I wouldn't if someone tried it in any 'real world' community. Frankly, I would be surprised if you would even attempt saying something like that in front of, say, Metafilter users face-to-face, because you know that you'd be told to get the fuck out of the room right now.
posted by adrianhon at 4:52 PM on September 21, 2001


I gathered Dogmatics's point, but he/she comes off as an elitist while trying to make it. It's one unimportant thread on a Friday, it's certaintly nothing to raise your nose at.
posted by linuxkitty at 4:55 PM on September 21, 2001


Hold on a sec. If you don't like this "new thread", get out. If the party goes haywire, leave. Nobody is making any of you read what is being posted now. The truth is, though, that everybody loves to read a good argument. Even you, mathowie, are somehow enthralled enough in this discussion that you would feel the need to post your two cents. Face it, you all love it.
posted by Cookie from Unlovely at 4:56 PM on September 21, 2001


Matt: And I was doing it very poorly, but thanks...

Cookie: Dogmatic is a she?
posted by dogmatic at 4:56 PM on September 21, 2001


mathowie, I haven't stepped into metafilter to be disrespectful. I believe my response to the original post was neither obnoxious nor bullshit, but if I'm wrong then I'd LOVE an explaination as to why. I also can't speak for everyone else who showed up to post, nor can I speak on their actions as we are different people. I speak for me personally in saying sure I got silly, but it was only in response to already established metafilter members. so I'm confused as to what I did wrong. I feel dogmatic was rude and elitist, and I stand by that. if he had a point it was lost in the way he presented it COMPLETELY.
posted by hunyglazed ham at 4:57 PM on September 21, 2001


Adrianhon: Would you believe me if I told you that I have spit out a chunk of undercooked meat that my mother once prepaired for me in high school, and then commented "Dear GOD, this fetus tastes HORRIBLE!" to her face?

If that seems to be a far stretch for you, would you believe then, that my mother laughed at that comment?

If I can do something like that in front of my mother, I'd certaintly do it in front of you.
posted by linuxkitty at 4:58 PM on September 21, 2001


Id dogmatic a she? If not, I want to hiss him. What if Dogmatic is neither? Wouldn't that be kinky.....
posted by Cookie from Unlovely at 5:01 PM on September 21, 2001


Ohhhh.... Dogmatic's a hottie! An elitist, stupid hottie!
posted by Cookie from Unlovely at 5:03 PM on September 21, 2001


Good for your mother. Unfortunately that was in a totally different context to this situation, do you see? Where it might have been marginally amusing and perhaps not completely inappropriate to say that to your mother after eating a chunk of undercooked meat, I don't think it's anywhere near as amusing or as appropriate coming out with it here out of the blue.
posted by adrianhon at 5:07 PM on September 21, 2001


[I don't think it's anywhere near as amusing or as appropriate coming out with it here out of the blue.]

adrianhon: And that is where you and i differ. I know it's hard, but please accept the fact that people are different. I thought it was -quite- humorous.
posted by linuxkitty at 5:10 PM on September 21, 2001


If the party goes haywire, leave. Nobody is making any of you read what is being posted now.

I think the point that dogmatic is trying to make is that you're disrupting what is going on here, so it's not about the hosts leaving their own party, it's... y'know, the other way around.

Even you, mathowie, are somehow enthralled enough in this discussion that you would feel the need to post your two cents. Face it, you all love it

If you believe that, you are delusional.


honeyglazed: Look, this place has it's generally accepted "rules" and cam sites and E/N sites have theirs. All the things I described earlier, the mood, the vibe, the discourse, etc. is different for every community. To generalize for a second, it seems that the cam community tends towards the silly, and that's not what is considered normal here. That's all anyone non-cam related in this thread is saying. You guys are being disruptive, but it's harmless and goofy, and there's no sense in fighting about it, so whatever, keep posting drivel.
posted by mathowie at 5:14 PM on September 21, 2001


mathowie, somebody is forcing you to post, then? My bad. I thought you might have been posting on your own free will. Seeing as you are at gunpoint, death-or-die posting, you have won this argument.
posted by Cookie from Unlovely at 5:16 PM on September 21, 2001


Fine. And I'm saying that the vast majority of people on Metafilter will find it completely offensive and that they don't want to see that sort of comment on their community website.

[ I was considering making an analogy to those 'different' terrorists who destroyed the WTC towers, but decided that it wasn't worth it. ]

Yes, I'm intolerant of what you said, but only because you appear to have absolutely zero respect for the tone of this community. As has been said by others, tolerance should be shown to all - except for those who are themselves intolerant.

I think this will be my last post to this topic. After all, you'll probably all go away once we ignore you.
posted by adrianhon at 5:19 PM on September 21, 2001


Mathowie: You call it drivel like its a bad thing. Yet you also use the words "harmless, goofy and silly" to describe what us 'cam-folk' are about. I personally think that the lot of us posting right here and now have a point.

I'll also say that Dogmatic had a point as well, though was acting like an ass about it.

If some of us are being silly, it seems by his standards that any point we had to make is cancelled out. Same to him, though. If you act like a snotty cunt, who's going to take you seriously?

I bet one of you Metafilter folks just pissed your pants because the word cunt was mentioned. :-D Kewliez, kthx.
posted by linuxkitty at 5:22 PM on September 21, 2001


I wonder what would happen if someone...just ONE person actually visited my site (other than to retrieve my cam url) and found out that I am neither in the cam community OR the e/n community. I don't consider myself to be in ANY one community to be honest, as I have associates of many varieties, but if you held a gun to my head I'd say I'm a blog/journalist. I agreed to participate in survivorcam1 and 2 not only to lend a design, but to get to know a different crowd.

anyhow, that still really doesn't address the fact that the only silly things I said were, ONCE AGAIN, in response to already established MF members. so...I'm confused. do I have to have at least 10 posts before I can joke around a little? why am I being held to standards older members don't seem to be held to? hence me using the word "elitist".

this post didn't even start as something intelligent, so pardon me if I threw the "vibe" off by responding accordingly to jokes that seemed to be all in good fun. and even now, as I am holding my weight quite well in the discussion this has turned into, my contributions are being called "drivel". wow.

well here is what I think of metafilter, and I just registered hours ago. it feels like a country club. and I guess I am "riff raff". I actually DO have the capability of participating in so-called intelligent discourse, all one would have to do is visit my site to see that. (and believe me, this is not an attempt at a cheap plug, I'm trying to prove a point.) but why bother?
posted by hunyglazed ham at 5:25 PM on September 21, 2001


mathowie:If you need an analogy, I'm throwing a party, and that party has been going on all night, and everyone's mellow, drinking lightly, talking amongst themselves. Everyone has gotten to know each other and is getting along. Then a group busts in, spills punch on the white carpet, starts yelling across the room to each other while dancing on tables.

cookie from unlovely: Hold on a sec. If you don't like this "new thread", get out. If the party goes haywire, leave.

i thought this was matt's party....
posted by lotsofno at 5:25 PM on September 21, 2001


smote! smote! smote!
lather, rinse, repeat
posted by machaus at 5:29 PM on September 21, 2001


Yes, I'm intolerant of what you said, but only because you appear to have absolutely zero respect for the tone of this community. As has been said by others, tolerance should be shown to all - except for those who are themselves intolerant.

adriahonsonson: You guys have no respect for -us-, hence we came here. Please look at the original post on the main page again. How do you expect me to respect such a hypocritical community? With the original post in place, being anything BUT tolerant, why in the hellicious fuck should I respect a damn thing written on here?

I think this will be my last post to this topic. After all, you'll probably all go away once we ignore you.

Oh, quite the opposite. I'm thinking about staying. You guys need a silly camgirl to brighten up your day.
posted by linuxkitty at 5:30 PM on September 21, 2001


Oh great, ANOTHER Survivorcam'er...yes, that'll be moi...and because this is already hilarious, i'll be typical, add my 3 cents and leave...

i too would like to learn how i can throw my social life away and belong to this kewliez thingy you people call metafilter. i had no idea it possessed such powers to brainwash the human mind, and make people think that this forum is the most significant bullshit on earth. This is just like that Hale Bopp Cult, that killed themselves to go to the moon. Kewliez! Where do I sign up??

Dogmatic you were rude. even IF you were trying to make a "point" you should have write it on Word and re-read the shit over and over before you typed it here. Seeing as how everybody's so dull and lifeless here, i dont feel its necessary to point out that you guys all need to get laid, preferably by a girl, and enjoy life and stop taking shit so fucking seriously. End of story. Doggie, Maybe you shouldn't take so much pride in this forum and go out and buy yourself a better shirt and spend some time in the sun, because it really isn't that serious. Jesus. And if you posting your picture was an aid to scare people away, you have effectively done your job...so yes, this is a post and run, because to keep coming back would defeat the purpose, besides, i'd rather watch paint dry.

toodles!!!~~~~**!!@#
posted by Resha at 5:32 PM on September 21, 2001


I suddenly feel like that old man sitting on a park bench in the 1980s feeding the pigeons, when a punk arrives with a giant radio blasting out 'The Sex Pistols'. You do wonder what might happen if Mefi regulars turned up at a camgrrl ICQ and started having discussions about the WTC, Dubya and the state of American satire. Share and enjoy...
posted by feelinglistless at 5:36 PM on September 21, 2001


Spoiled camgirls crash a party, act like giggling teenagers, tell MeFi to "lighten UP", and get all pouty when we take exception to their antics?

This thread is hilarious. Kewliez!
posted by turaho at 5:37 PM on September 21, 2001


Please look at the original post on the main page again. How do you expect me to respect such a hypocritical community?

Do not in any way judge the community by the original post. It was done by someone that joined solely to comment in the first survivorblog thread, and I'm guessing you "cam-folk" probably know who it is. It's a crap post frankly, and if I saw it when it was first posted, I would have deleted it for its stupidity and troll-ishness. Look at everything else posted today and notice this one thread sticks out as poorly written (especially the juvenile "flame me now").
posted by mathowie at 5:38 PM on September 21, 2001 [1 favorite]


how can you possibly expect that by writing

"online reality games go straight to the gutter first survivorer, then survivorblog, then survivorblog 2, then survivorcam, then survivorer 2, then puppetmaster... now another incarnation of survivorcam. how much more can we take? flame me now. kthx."

A bunch of us won't get up-in-arms? Good lord. You write a post about how we all are "Going straight to the gutter" and then get upset when we defend our game. Again, IF YOU DON"T LIKE IT HERE, LEAVE. NOBODY IS FORCING YOU TO STAY HERE. If you attack a mass group of people like what has been done, don't you dare get condescending and say we are ruining "a vibe" once we start arguing with you. Get a grip. Your logic is poor, to say the best.
posted by Cookie from Unlovely at 5:40 PM on September 21, 2001


Gee feelinglistless, are you incinuating that a certain group of people [cam girls] wouldn't be able to discuss current events like the WTC? Thats a pretty steriotype.

And all blacks run around robbing and killing people, and use undesirable slang, right?
posted by linuxkitty at 5:45 PM on September 21, 2001


Come on metafilter. I spent some time at survivorcam and these are some classy folks. Really, I swear.

Nice to have you here linuxkitty. Hopefully, you'll bring your sister. She's hot. What was her webpage title? An underage piece of ass? I hear she's a lot of fun!

kewlies!
posted by dantheman at 5:52 PM on September 21, 2001


how absolutely sad and pathetic. while our nation unites to confront the horrible terror of the past 9 days, the posters here at MeFi are choosing to create divisive lines between those of the "Cam-E/N" community and their own pseudo-intellectual posting community. to generalize with regard to ANY community is wrong and inherently flawed: did you not learn anything from the past few days?

i pity you, for you will never feel the same sense of camaraderie that we "unfortunate silly cam people" do, and will live a lonely life, revelling only in the sound of your own lonely voices.

kthxbi~~~*!! [and yes, this ending salutation is a joke. learn to lighten up a bit.]
posted by marissatomic at 5:52 PM on September 21, 2001


You meta regulars consider yourselves great debators and philosophers and thinkers. You seem to have this air of "we have important things to say and camgirls are silly twats." Get over yourself. I have looked through some of the other topics, and you all are simply spitting back the rhetoric handed to you by Peter Jennings or Newsweek. I have seen no original ideas, nor logical arguments. Indeed, mathowie's only line of defense was to call me "dilusional" when I suggested that he likes to watch people argue. Now is that any way to behave?

Once one of you will practice the actual art of debating, I not only have no respect for your mental processes, but no tolerance for your snobbish, elitist behavior.
posted by Cookie from Unlovely at 5:54 PM on September 21, 2001


dantheman: Oh, so you -know- who I am! Regular reader? I always love the fans.
posted by linuxkitty at 6:01 PM on September 21, 2001


Linuxkitty! Yes, I remember you from the salon article. I'd like to get to know your little sister instead though. She's more my style from what I've heard.
posted by dantheman at 6:05 PM on September 21, 2001


why is it every single solitary good point I've made (and several others have made) has been ignored? could it be because theres truth in some of my/our statements? I'm going to rest with that conclusion. I've made valid points and they've ALL been ignored in favor of calling me a 'camgirl' and calling my valid arguments 'drivel'. I think its ironic that metafilter, which claims to be open to intellectual discourse, can't even take the time to do a little research and instead applies stereotypes to EVERYONE affiliated with survivorcam who has posted here. the vibe here isn't intellectual, its elitist and rather catty as well. maybe you all don't feel I, for one, am "worth" responding to, even if I say something that makes sense. but if thats the case, please stop with the pigeonholing.

you have members calling subjects they don't agree with "obnoxious bullshit". you have members engaging in the same silliness you claim to reject. you have members petty enough to pull someone's 15 year old sister into the equation! spiteful and disrespectful...I thought you all didn't advocate that sort of thing?

the hypocricy is amazing. if you're going to hold new posters to a set of high-siddity standards, try to check your older posters as well. your country club isn't as shiny and flawless as you think, and your members aren't all as intelligent either. snobs.

now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to watch the tribute. my cousin was killed and it means a lot to me. as my very first post here indicated, survivorcam is a silly little escape for me. but this thread has once again reminded me that some people are just plain nasty.

peace/blessings.
posted by hunyglazed ham at 6:08 PM on September 21, 2001


Actually, Dan, class isn't about cheapshot. You're about as classy as they get. The sister picked her own webpage title, and frankly, I dont see what -she- has to do with this arguement, right here and now.
posted by linuxkitty at 6:08 PM on September 21, 2001


There's an old rule for participating in online forums. I think it may have originated on Usenet. In any case, it goes like this: Always lurk for thirty days before posting.

The idea is that, regardless of how good your intentions are, regardless of how friendly you may be, regardless of whether you mean any harm, it's very hard to participate well in the discussion in a forum before you know what the tone of discussion on that forum tends to be. So, it's better to wait a while and read quietly before jumping in, or, if for some reason you have to jump in, to read a lot of archives first.

It's not that we think you're stupid, or unworthy, or not right for our special community--it's just that the posts you came in with aren't the kinds of things we come here to read.

And there's another thing they do on Usenet--not so much a rule, but a habit picked up out of desperation. If someone isn't making the effort to fit the tone of your forum, flame them mercilesly and act like an asshole, making no effort to encourage or even understand them, until they either go away or learn to behave. That one's still controversial here.
posted by moss at 6:53 PM on September 21, 2001 [1 favorite]


You meta regulars consider yourselves great debators and philosophers and thinkers. You seem to have this air of "we have important things to say and camgirls are silly twats."

I'm sure that's not true.

*You* camgirls, however, are silly twats.
posted by rodii at 6:59 PM on September 21, 2001


Wowie, we sure got schooled. Hey mathowie, you'd better shut down the site now that our empty, shallow nature has been revealed--we sure wouldn't want the world to know what poseurs we all are, witlessly regurgitating media outlets. I'm not sure I can look at myself in the mirror now without thinking of the black vacuum which is located where my heart would be, if I had one.
OMG WTF BBQ KTHXBYE LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
posted by darukaru at 7:01 PM on September 21, 2001


And there's another thing they do on Usenet--not so much a rule, but a habit picked up out of desperation. If someone isn't making the effort to fit the tone of your forum, flame them mercilesly and act like an asshole, making no effort to encourage or even understand them, until they either go away or learn to behave. That one's still controversial here.

...and herein lies the problem. This is what dogmatic was doing (check his self-portrait if you don't believe me), and I tried to steer the discussion away from that and explain these very points.

I also understand the feelings of everyone new here in this thread. I hear "people on metafilter are too uptight" all the time. And I can see that people take this place as seriously as their personal living room. They yell at people to leave when they're doing the slightest against the norm.

When I think of the places in my neighborhood that I don't like, that are too uppity, are too arsty-fartsy, are too rednecky, or too chic, I think many of the same things. I don't like the vibe there and feel like I'm being harrased if I even go in there, because I don't fit it. But with a bar/restaurant/coffeeshop like that, I don't have to be there, and I just avoid those places. Instead I've found several restaurants that have a cool vibe, I have a few favorite places to get breakfast, and a couple places where I feel comfortable getting a drink. Find the place that most meets your mood, where people share your outlook, and where good conversation is to be found. If this place is too uppity/snobby/elitist to you, this probably isn't the best place. It's not going to change for you, and everyone who thinks they're smarter/wittier/funnier is going to make antagonistic posts about you whenever you post. If cam sites or E/N sites or any other site seems too silly, too laid-back, or too humorous, that's probably not the right place either. Finding your place isn't easy, and there's something to be said about the importance of lurking.

I join and quit at least a dozen mailing lists a year. I've only got about 3 or 4 I still subscribe too, and one or two of those aren't really doing it for me anymore. It's tough to find a community that is a good fit.
posted by mathowie at 7:07 PM on September 21, 2001


Well-said Moss. In complete understanding and agreement.
posted by linuxkitty at 7:07 PM on September 21, 2001


mathowie: Thanks for steering things away from flames and towards more reasonable explanation. I'm consistently impressed at how much you do to keep the conversation here civil and intelligent, without descending to intimidation (which I fear I still fall back on sometimes--apologies for my first post in this thread.)

linuxkitty: Thank you. That means a lot to me, especially considering how dismissive I'd been towards you just few hours earlier.
posted by moss at 8:15 PM on September 21, 2001


This thread looks like it was constructed as a workbook excercise to acompany Derek's book.

The party metaphor is a good one.

Its not about better or worse, it is about *established vibe.*

Thanks for being a wise and compassionate host, Matt. Party on.

p.s. You may enjoy the parallels to my (physical) party manifesto
posted by halcyon at 8:33 PM on September 21, 2001


This thread reads like an impossibly l33t IRC chat.
posted by glenwood at 8:54 PM on September 21, 2001


I understand and agree with a lot of what was just said. At the same time, you have to recognise what the whole topic of this thread was about. I personally do not consider myself a camgirl, but more of an e/n blogger who happens to have a cam. At the same time, though, I take it offensively when the game that I am a part of is attacked. I am an intelligent person fully capable of holding my own in almost any discussion, and willing to learn what I do not already know.

I'm going to use the party metaphore to show my main point: If you have a party with a theme of "football players are stupid lugheads", you cannot be surprised nor upset when football players come and crash your party. The same applies here.
Besides, if you all are as intelligent as you think you are, you would be able to find other, more important things to write about, not just that cam-games are stupid.
posted by Cookie from Unlovely at 9:17 PM on September 21, 2001


wow... that was bad (the irrational bickering, not the entrance or perceived "elitist attitudes" of certain people.). the last couple of posts though have been nice. even halcyon, who i refer to in my head as "the-cam-guy", showed up with nice words and a very nice link. worlds colliding never ends up clean, as was shown during the last e/n conversation.
posted by lotsofno at 9:26 PM on September 21, 2001


cookie: this entire thread was started by a poster who has made 0 contributions to the metafilter community outside of discussing internetgossip and survivorcam. it's pretty clear that this was simply a troll to help attact attention to survivorcam.

i'd say it was successful.
posted by lescour at 10:28 PM on September 21, 2001


Gee feelinglistless, are you incinuating that a certain group of people [cam girls] wouldn't be able to discuss current events like the WTC? Thats a pretty steriotype.

Not at all. That was sarcasm based upon recent posts in the thread at that time. If you look closer you'll see I was working that stereotype both ways...
posted by feelinglistless at 11:27 PM on September 21, 2001


you all are meanies..
MEANIES!!!

Everyone here is acting very ugly. Face it this is the "gated community" of online BLOGS (yeah you read that right.. you are an E/N site; only less funny).
If this is how you treat new and different people in your community..you can have it you bunch of NAZIS!
Remember, you were new once too...

kthxbi <333
posted by paralysisbyanalysis at 11:50 PM on September 21, 2001


kthxbi &lt;333

I cannot possibly evaluate the truth of this statement without knowing the values of the variables k, t, h, x, b, and i.
posted by kindall at 12:25 AM on September 22, 2001 [7 favorites]


I feel that the whole online webcam thing is fun. It has its dark underbelly... but it's driven by people on the cams... In a word: it's honest. They aren't trying to be revolutionary, they just do their thing and if people like it they watch. Sure, it could be construed as a glorified popularity contest... But, even if you weren’t cool in high-school, you can still be cool online!

The web cam community has its own pulse, groove, rhythm -- whatever you want to call it -- that is set by its members. Personally, I am looking forward to seeing where it goes. Where will these people be in 10, 15, even 20 years? Will they be 40 year olds with kids showing their less-then-perky breasts on surviorcam320? Or will they have moved on? Maybe it will turn out to breeding ground for would-be stars, journalists, etc. Because it's never been so accessible – easy even -- to be a star in your own mind, there is good chance that our next world-famous star might have started their "career" as cam girl/boy. Stranger things have happened...
posted by dawiz at 1:46 AM on September 22, 2001


I have a pulse...or something close to a pulse...it's in my pants and it's 2 inches fully erect. Anyways. This thread or topic or meta or filter or what ever it's called is kinda cool. I want to post more because I have nothing else to do.

I love this stuff..and yes this has nothing to do with the actual topic...but soon there will be a topic about...topics and how cool they are..and this one will fit in just fine :)

Le-bastard
LOSER EXTRAORDINAIRE
posted by lebastard at 2:29 AM on September 22, 2001


all the grown ups of metafilter emerged after I made my adieu apparently.
posted by hunyglazed ham at 3:39 AM on September 22, 2001


For my two cents worth, my comment:

Web Celebrity Alert 2

Oh my god is that the real Huny??


was just trying to be sarcastic about how many survivor and survivor 2 spin offs there seem to be these days.

Except I do respect Huny a great deal since her's was the first site that really inspired me in web design.
posted by Saima at 7:06 AM on September 22, 2001


Jeez u Yanks carry on
posted by johnny7 at 8:19 AM on September 22, 2001


To quote from MetaTalk, after reading this thread I feel as if 'my brain has been sucked out of my ass'. The original post was stupid, and the thread that followed more so. I have such respect for Matt, for actually trying to reason with you brainless children. I would have banned all of you and killed the entire mess. Don't call me elitest. I've been here for all of a month. Youl give all newbies a black eye; and, frankly I'm now ashamed of being part of PuppetMaster because it means I was part of the same brain-trust that spawned the games that attracted you. Good lord, even posting in this thread is killing brain cells.
posted by FunkyHelix at 8:34 AM on September 22, 2001


Isn't it Godwin's Law that says the arguement is over when the losing side announces everyone else is a nazi? Just checking.
posted by FunkyHelix at 8:38 AM on September 22, 2001


shea! long time no see...

[incidentally, "funkyhelix" is shea from puppetmaster, not helix of survivorcam... and clearly, "dogmatic" is not vilette of dogmatic law but an a-list blogger wannabe. oops, i'm sorry, i said that out loud. hehe, my bad. *holds hand over mouth in mock-embarrassment*]

you realize that i love you, right? shea? i do!

i thought a rather um... animated discussion resulted from this post. i am amazed at how polarized these web communities have become. it's just the internet, guys... i recall that thread about internetgossip.net and watching the snipes rain down upon piggy's web project and thinking, i feel like i am watching a bunch of chess club geeks muttering about how cheerleaders and jocks suck. the irony of this situation is that on the net, even the 'jocks' are geeks. anyone with a regularly updated web site is a geek. anyone who spends more than two hours a day on the net is a geek. the non-geeks are all out doing whatever non-geeks do. i wouldn't know what they do, because i am a geek. *grin*

unite, o geeks. and let us share from the same bowl of punch. or something to that effect. i'm not too articulate this morning. soju does that to a person.

apologies to matthowie. i just couldn't resist. it's tough job being a self-absorbed facetious twit. but someone has to do it. i swear, i'll be good from now on. i promise! =D

was any of this sarcastic? i'm still debating. *shhhh!*
posted by survivorcam at 9:31 AM on September 22, 2001


Yeah well Godwin was a NAZI..
okay okay.. that was cheap.

MY point was everyone here has an "Us vs Them" mentality.
(myself included because while i have read mefi for a year or 2 this is my second post ever) The sooner each side sees the other side for all it's gains and faults, and learns that we can "share" the internet the better. CAm and webgame people tend to be a little young and silly. Mefi people tend to have sticks up their butts and pride themselves on intellectual discussions. Yay.. guess what.. WHO CARES?!!
If you just keep on doing what you have been doing, without slandering the other group, we'll all get along, and all the camkids and survivorcam2 people will go back to their UBB and things will return to normal as soon as this thread loses steam.
So sit tight you intellectual fashionistas and keep your snide comments to yourselves and wait it out. :)
posted by paralysisbyanalysis at 10:05 AM on September 22, 2001


'twas fun while it lasted, eh paralysis?

/me tosses paralysis a bottle of heineken.

it's on me, man. something to hold you over while you read about the WTC discussions on here.

i'll be lurkin' just around the corner >=D
posted by survivorcam at 10:41 AM on September 22, 2001


"dogmatic" is not vilette of dogmatic law but an a-list blogger wannabe. (my emphasis)

I guess that's what you mean by elitism. Glad I understand now.
posted by adampsyche at 11:53 AM on September 22, 2001


I'm glad the person that started this entire mess has shown up to teach us all a moral lesson.

Way to go, Bertie! See ya next time someone mentions one of your games!
posted by dogmatic at 12:55 PM on September 22, 2001


go back to where you come from!
we don't want you here!
I hope they stay confined to their ghettos!
no one invited yer community to invade ours!
stay with your own kind!

metatalk/metafilter, you people are slightly intelligent...need I even say what you sound like? wow. well, I'll "go back to my ghetto now" from where I came and "stay confined to it" at least with the knowledge that everything I initially thought about this place is the truth. "my kind" (haven't figured out what that is yet) is not welcome here and I tarnish the good name of metafilter with my "stupid" and "ghetto" drivel. interesting.

honestly, I would rather slit my wrists then stick around this place, although I had thought about it after surveying other topics. if I let your words speak for themselves, some of you have the mentality of racists. now you can "thank god" that once again your neighborhood is safe from "my kind" and laugh it off.

my father keeps reminding me some of you are still around.
posted by hunyglazed ham at 1:02 PM on September 22, 2001


Dogmatic is not very smart, is he?

After this, Bertie will most likely be here for quite some time lurking.

I know I'm now an official lurker. This article wasnt very interesting, nor was this thread. But other articles have been cool. And I plan on commenting on them. Someone, delete my account now, before the big-bad camgirl has something to say.

Feh.

This is all rather stupid. But now I realize it's mainly just this Dogmatic person who's stupid enough to keep flaming something, and not the entire MeFi community. I wish some of you actually took the time to pick out individuals instead of the whole camkids community as well.

Hats off to Moss [though I'm ignoring your last comment] and the Matt? guy.
posted by linuxkitty at 1:03 PM on September 22, 2001


kitty, bertie has already been lurking here for quite some time. It's only when she finds a topic worthy of her (ie one that mentions her), that she bothers to post worthless tripe.

Hence, 'See ya next time someone mentions one of your games!' Not that I mind, you understand.
posted by dogmatic at 1:20 PM on September 22, 2001


there are those here to have fun and those who take the internet quite too seriously. If the people in your clique bothered you, you should just go and make your own fun threads and stop aggravating yourself.

Good analogy by Bertie though about the geeks talking about the cool kids. But the same can be said about the cool kids talking about the geeks. Perspective sucks. I think that if you let it go and just have fun, then you won't be anal about much of anything in your life.

I was a geek in school but didn't give a shit. I am still a geek now and I don't talk about anyone unless they are fucking with me (in that case, I will go ape shit and shoot an animal out of love) Just let it go. Not that hard. Just asking for some solidarity..that's all......... thanks.

PS great thread BTW :)
posted by lebastard at 1:27 PM on September 22, 2001


I was watching a documentary recently about Deion Sanders that included some commentary by Bob Costas. Mr. Costas observed that we live in an era where obnoxiousness is confused as style. This thread is certainly proof of that.
posted by ljromanoff at 1:28 PM on September 22, 2001 [1 favorite]


and certainly, romanoff, you do realize that obnoxiousness is a matter of perception?

i would imagine that the "large brains" circling this this community, whose header says ironically enough "we are all in this together", would be able to grasp that point.

apparently, "we are all in this together" need to be amended to "unless you have a webcam on your page".
posted by marissatomic at 1:34 PM on September 22, 2001


Jennifer Ringley has a fuck of a lot to answer for.
posted by holgate at 1:37 PM on September 22, 2001


E/N = Everything/Nothing. Here's the accurate if somewhat long in the tooth History of E/N.

What the genre has evolved into is a whole other matter entirely. But that's a discussion for another time.


Genre? History? You 'E/N' people don't really take yourselves that seriously, do you? You remind me of junior high school kids who labor to come with a cool name and rules for your 'club'. Do you have cool satin jackets with a big 'E/N' on the back as well?
posted by ljromanoff at 1:39 PM on September 22, 2001


and certainly, romanoff, you do realize that obnoxiousness is a matter of perception?

I think the real problem is the lack of perception of obnoxiousness. And that's Mr. Romanoff, thank you very much.

apparently, "we are all in this together" need to be amended to "unless you have a webcam on your page".

You think you webcam types have it tough on MetaFilter? Try being a libertarian capitalist. You're still swimming in the shallow end of the MetaFilter acid bath.
posted by ljromanoff at 1:44 PM on September 22, 2001


I think the real problem is the lack of perception of obnoxiousness. And that's Mr. Romanoff, thank you very much.

perception being, of course, that whole "eye of the beholder" thing...and i make no assumptions on gender ever, so my apologies to your rowdy manhood.

You think you webcam types have it tough on MetaFilter? Try being a libertarian capitalist. You're still swimming in the shallow end of the MetaFilter acid bath.

i was speaking merely in the context of this thread, and the even more offensive thread in MetaTalk. i can only imagine the schizophrenia caused by being a libertarian capitalist.

i must thank you for being one of the kinder and more intelligent posters to this thread.
posted by marissatomic at 1:53 PM on September 22, 2001


huny is dead: on metatalk that dogmatic BITCH started a post and they're all in there like "i hope they stay confined to their ghetto"
huny is dead: i was like WHAAAT
LinuxkittyoCom: yeah. it reminds me of what i used to think as a racist.
huny is dead: yea dammit! if YOU can see it i know i'm not wrong
huny is dead: *sigh*
posted by linuxkitty at 1:58 PM on September 22, 2001


perception being, of course, that whole "eye of the beholder" thing...and i make no assumptions on gender ever, so my apologies to your rowdy manhood.

My rowdy manhood accepts your apology.

i can only imagine the schizophrenia caused by being a libertarian capitalist.

Yeah, it's not easy, but the American pharmaceutical industry makes lots of lovely products that help me out.
posted by ljromanoff at 2:06 PM on September 22, 2001


well dogmatic, you certainly thought that it was worth your while to comment on my 'worthless tripe' and to sift through various old threads to find the rest of my 'worthless tripe.' kudos to you. i am almost impressed. and flattered you would take the time to hunt down my 'worthless' contributions, which were but two small needles in the immense MeFi haystack, if you will. hypocritical much?

and what's wrong with commenting on something that has something to do with me directly? you would do it too. yes, my initial tone was not in synch with the general MeFi tone, it was not to be taken seriously. just harmless silliness on a friday afternoon. marissa's initial comment shouldn't be taken seriously either. nor huny's. it amuses me that you have taken these comments literally, and that you are continuing to take stabs at us, even after we have explained ourselves in no uncertain terms.

huny's well-crafted follow-up explanations and arguments were pretty much ignored, and then dogmatic decided that this thread was such 'worthless tripe' that he went and started a thread about this thread on metatalk. again, hypocritical much?

in any case, i moseyed on over there and saw not logical arguments or anything resembling the intellectual discourse MeFi allegedly prides itself on, but puerile snipes and petty insults hidden under the cloak of mediocre rhetoric. well, what can i say?

*shrug*

i hope this was as fun as it was for you as it was for me. and thank you for the added traffic.

also, kat, mathowie is the owner of this site. although i disagree with some of his comments about 'finding one's niche' i think he has been patient throughout this little diversion. as with any site, there are always a few bad apples. this site is one of the most well-traveled sites in the 'blog' and 'news' community, with a great collection of links. and it seems that a good number of the visitors to this site DO lurk and not comment, partly because they probably feel like they will not be welcomed by the more snooty members of this community. i am not making this up. i've had plenty of AOL IM conversations touching upon this very topic. yes mathowie, your site is not 'worthless tripe' in my book. it is a pretty damned good site. however, some of your regulars are, i am sorry to say.

in any case, carry on... i'm still here. kind of.
posted by survivorcam at 2:06 PM on September 22, 2001


well dogmatic, you certainly thought that it was worth your while to comment on my 'worthless tripe' and to sift through various old threads to find the rest of my 'worthless tripe.' kudos to you. i am almost impressed. and flattered you would take the time to hunt down my 'worthless' contributions, which were but two small needles in the immense MeFi haystack, if you will. hypocritical much?

um. it wasn't that hard, really. i clicked on your name, which tells me when you joined and how many posts and comments you've made (first link). i clicked on the number of comments, which told me which threads you've posted in (second link). I clicked on the comments of the first of two threads you've commented on (the second being this one), and voila! easy as apple pie and no search involved. technology's wacky like that.

as for the MetaTalk thread, i created it because of the nonsense in this thread, which is what we do around here. in particular, I was making the case that a waiting period would have prevented the vast majority of posts from people that wanted to show up out of nowhere and say hi to one another. what the MetaTalk thread became is an entirely different story.

and my beef with huny ended here. i thought the 'good day' made that perfectly clear. the conversation ended, she kept talking. what else is there to say?
posted by dogmatic at 2:27 PM on September 22, 2001


if your "beef" with huny ended in this thread, what was your need then to carry it over to MetaTalk?
posted by marissatomic at 3:08 PM on September 22, 2001


the MeTa post happened before the 'beef' ended. (check the times) and besides, it was not directly related with my argument with her, but with a bunch of strangers crapping in a thread.
posted by dogmatic at 3:14 PM on September 22, 2001


linuxkitty:

yeah. it reminds me of what i used to think as a racist.

Great story on your page. As a recent newcomer to metafilter, I'm not certain that I understand the reason for the divisiveness here.

I think that the diversity of viewpoints expressed in this thread is a good thing. It makes metafilter more of a complete society. While we (as a society) may not always agree with everything everyone else has to say, or with the way that they say it, it's important to be able to look a the world from a number of different perspectives. The world isn't always black and white.

I know that metafilter operates under a certain set of "unwritten rules" and I saw a number of them cited here - like looking through metatalk to get an idea of how to get along with others when commenting. I wish that would have been a suggestion made when I signed up as a new user. Sort of a "Here's some suggestions on using the site." Dogma's comments above on how to get around the site, and how to use a metatalk thread are a couple of other things that it would be great to see when joining.

To you new members, regardless of where you come from, be it cam sites, e/n sites, or wherever, I'd like to say welcome, and I hope your visits here are positive ones for you, and for everyone else. To the folks who have been here for a while, and have made this a place worth visiting, I'd like to say thank you for making this a place what it is.
posted by bragadocchio at 3:18 PM on September 22, 2001


huny's well-crafted follow-up explanations and arguments were pretty much ignored, and then dogmatic decided that this thread was such 'worthless tripe' that he went and started a thread about this thread on metatalk.

dogmatic: i was talking about huny's posts being ignored in general, not necessarily by you. your mention in that paragraph was in regards to your posting about this thread in metatalk.

now we're getting petty, and i don't feel like being petty at this juncture.

so...

dogmatic, GOOD DAY.
posted by survivorcam at 3:28 PM on September 22, 2001


<post class="(il)logical conclusion">Nader Nader Nader!</post>
posted by jdunn_entropy at 5:06 PM on September 22, 2001


You think you webcam types have it tough on MetaFilter? Try being a libertarian capitalist. You're still swimming in the shallow end of the MetaFilter acid bath.

Hell, Lance, why do things halfway? I'm sure there's a market out there for RandCam.
posted by snarkout at 5:10 PM on September 22, 2001


Hell, Lance, why do things halfway? I'm sure there's a market out there for RandCam.

Libertarians and objectivists aren't the same thing. And with Ayn Rand dead now for over 19 years, a "RandCam" would be a morbid experience indeed.
posted by ljromanoff at 5:41 PM on September 22, 2001


Metafilter is great! Don't change a thing... How can we complain about a place where the topic starts with discussion about girls who show their breasts on the web and ends with jokes about Libertarianism and Objectivism? What a diverse bunch! Let's keep it this way folks!
posted by dawiz at 7:43 PM on September 22, 2001 [1 favorite]


I think it comes down to respect. The initial post was a set up for trouble. I have no problem with people acting any way they want on their own sites, but it's always a good idea to not piss in the neighbor's pool.

Metafilter has had an ongoing struggle to maintain a certain level of conversation that, at it's most basic level, is about the mutual respect of those participating. Personal attacks are to be avoided, as are blatant attempts to be obscene.

I don't think being on the surviorcam makes one any less qualified to take part in your typical political thread as does being a regular Mefi member preclude any enjoyment of your typical e/n site. The actions of the few are precisely that. I've been hanging about this place for a while and I can say a large portion of the folks here are pretty good people and have never been keen on elitist crap.
posted by john at 8:46 PM on September 22, 2001


Genre? History? You 'E/N' people don't really take yourselves that seriously, do you?

Well, no more seriously than webloggers do. There have been countless threads on MetaFilter about the origins of weblogs, Ben Brown's desire to have longer and more substantive material, whether weblogs should be primarily link-driven or anecdote-driven, whether tools like Blogger encourage blogs from every e-newbie going, and whether those influxes of e-newbies are good things or bad things for the community at large, to say nothing of tongue-in-cheek commentary on "the A List" or cabals. I just don't understand why this self-obsession is acceptable standard fare if it's about weblogs but suddenly a laugh riot if another online community behaves similarly.

You remind me of junior high school kids who labor to come with a cool name and rules for your 'club'. Do you have cool satin jackets with a big 'E/N' on the back as well?

Contrast: "You remind me of disaffected college grads who labor to come up with cool tricks and rules for your local 'scene'. Do you have cool satin jackets with a big 'i am a blogger!' on the back as well?" But somehow my statement would magically be invalid because your online community is the "good" one. Brilliant, sir.

I understand and respect your navel-gazing. Why must you point fingers at and otherwise disparage ours?
posted by youhas at 9:08 PM on September 22, 2001


Hmmm. Metacomment on Metafilter, as a newbie who joined in the wake of WTC.

Comparing the posts at top to the posts at bottom, Metafilter does seem to police itself quite well. If tone was the problem, it was improved.
posted by Charmian at 11:49 PM on September 22, 2001


holgate, I [heart] you.

Your mention of Ms. Ringley brings up interesting questions. After her scandal last year, attention was briefly focused back on her. Now, however, even she is questioning why she's still camming it up. When the person who started it all is ready to throw in the towel and admit that the cam-girl's story has been told, how does that bode for her cyber-progeny?
posted by pudders at 2:52 AM on September 23, 2001


I just don't understand why this self-obsession is acceptable standard fare if it's about weblogs but suddenly a laugh riot if another online community behaves similarly.

I'm as willing to point out the sometimes elitist nature of MetaFilter people as the next guy, but I don't recall anyone referring to the 'MetaFilter genre' or writing about it's history as if it's the second coming of the Beat Generation.
posted by ljromanoff at 6:11 AM on September 23, 2001


It's not about elitism or anything like that, it's about a bunch of friends going on national television and saying "OMG! We're on national television! OMG you're on national televison, so am I OMG!", and the minute someone gets mad, they spew out longwinded retorts that try to be as eloquent as possible in order to prove their stereotypes wrong. Correct me if I'm wrong but would anyone be mad in the slightest bit if a bunch of camgirls jumped in this thread with something other than "Is that you? Hey it's me! Wow nice to see you on Metafilter!"?
posted by Laugh_track at 9:12 AM on September 23, 2001


ljr: I'm sorry if you interpret E/N "genre history" documents that way, as I don't believe they're intended as such.

Please understand that the expression "E/N site" means something wholly different today than it did eighteen months ago. What used to be something very analogous to the weblogging community has devolved into its current shock-value-and-tittilation overabundance. For those of us who have been labeling ourselves as E/N since the olden days, this shift is disheartening, and we feel the need to pipe up and tell folks that "this is not how it used to be" and "that's not what we mean when we say that." This seems like a natural community reaction, really.

To wit: If you had been calling yourself a libertarian capitalist since time immemorial only to find that now society had adopted radically different standard meanings of "libertarian" and "capitalist", would you feel the least bit obligated to set people's perceptions straight?
posted by youhas at 7:44 PM on September 23, 2001


To wit: If you had been calling yourself a libertarian capitalist since time immemorial only to find that now society had adopted radically different standard meanings of "libertarian" and "capitalist", would you feel the least bit obligated to set people's perceptions straight?

Or maybe I'd just change my label. After all, the term 'liberal' has already been hijacked by statists in the 20th century, essentially destroying its true meaning.

But more to the point, what I find amusing about the term E/N is that it seems to only be familiar to those involved in said clique. It's a bit of waste of time to name one's subculture if no one else has the slightest idea what you're talking about.
posted by ljromanoff at 7:45 AM on September 24, 2001


Admission: I have no idea what E/N means.
posted by davidgentle at 4:49 PM on September 24, 2001


It's a bit of waste of time to name one's subculture if no one else has the slightest idea what you're talking about.

Mention "blogs" and "blogging" in a random message board and the grand majority of people there wouldn't have have the slightest idea what you were talking about. I hardly think that renders the term "weblog" useless, though.

It's all a matter of scope and vantage, I suppose. I read E/N sites long before I had even heard of weblogs; when I first came across them, I had reactions similar to yours. "Who the hell are these people? What the hell is a 'blog'? They keep using it all over the place and it seems to be assumed that the reader knows what they're talking about, but I have no clue here. Why the lame new term? What's the point?"

Or maybe I'd just change my label. After all, the term 'liberal' has already been hijacked by statists in the 20th century, essentially destroying its true meaning.

True, that'd be the logical course of action. But we're collectively far too young and naïve idealistic for that. :-)
posted by youhas at 5:22 PM on September 24, 2001


Data point. I teach a web design class--60 fairly web-savvy college seniors, most of them in computer science or computer engineering, many of whom have had jobs working in the industry already. Monday, just by a weird coincidence, I had occasion to ask them "how many of you know what a weblog is?" and "how many of you know what an E/N site is?" Wanna know their answers?

Weblog: 1 person
E/N: 0 people
posted by rodii at 3:59 PM on September 26, 2001


Heh - I should've figured as much. It's really cool to get actual data on the matter, though - one point's vastly better than none. Thanks rodii.
posted by youhas at 4:50 PM on September 26, 2001


« Older Crypto guru getting blamed for his software....  |  The Al-Qaeda manual... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments