Christian Science Monitor Loves Metafilter
February 6, 2002 8:33 AM Subscribe
Christian Science Monitor Loves Metafilter almost as much as we do. They note such intriging stories as the woman who flushed herself out an airliner toilet and Googlewhacking. Big praise from the mainstream!
Although nicwolff had already linked to this in MetaTalk I think it truly deserves posting here on the MetaFilter front page.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 8:44 AM on February 6, 2002
posted by MiguelCardoso at 8:44 AM on February 6, 2002
asok: xtian scientists not considered real xtians by mainstream xtianity, any more than Mormons are considered real xtians.
posted by Faze at 8:52 AM on February 6, 2002
posted by Faze at 8:52 AM on February 6, 2002
Welcome to MetaFilter.com - specialists in Assisted Serendipity. heh.
posted by kahboom at 9:07 AM on February 6, 2002
posted by kahboom at 9:07 AM on February 6, 2002
The Christian Scientists dig us? Does this mean if the site goes down we can't repair it, but must let God cure the server?
posted by jonmc at 9:14 AM on February 6, 2002
posted by jonmc at 9:14 AM on February 6, 2002
well ok then, but i liked the 'Assisted Serendipity' phrase, new tagline?
posted by asok at 9:15 AM on February 6, 2002
posted by asok at 9:15 AM on February 6, 2002
I used to subscribe to the Christian Science Monitor. With the exception of its one- or two-page religion section, the paper wasn't making any attempt to be a voice of its religion. It was just a well-written paper with strong international coverage.
posted by rcade at 9:15 AM on February 6, 2002
posted by rcade at 9:15 AM on February 6, 2002
I don't think for a moment that its only the CSM using MeFi as a convenient source for stories. And I also don't think for a moment that the CSM is the only major publication now scanning MeFi and its web-brethren.
Attribution would be a nice touch (naming the FPP'er's username would be even sweeter).
But, noting the recent discussion in metatalk about the propriety of charging for access to MeFi, it wouldn't be so unreasonable for Major Pubs to toss MeFi a couple of bucks every time they grab a story, would it?
posted by BentPenguin at 9:44 AM on February 6, 2002
Attribution would be a nice touch (naming the FPP'er's username would be even sweeter).
But, noting the recent discussion in metatalk about the propriety of charging for access to MeFi, it wouldn't be so unreasonable for Major Pubs to toss MeFi a couple of bucks every time they grab a story, would it?
posted by BentPenguin at 9:44 AM on February 6, 2002
Aw shucks, the CSM liked my post about the WA state evolution/creationism legislation. BTW, the CSM is a pretty fine publication - they even run a decent pair of blogs, the LibLog and MonitorBlog. (caveat - I once worked on the CSM website).
posted by kokogiak at 10:09 AM on February 6, 2002
posted by kokogiak at 10:09 AM on February 6, 2002
I can see the breathless newspaper prose now: "As reported by dong_resin in last night's MetaFilter post..."
I'll probably see a picture of the Pope reading The Onion first.
posted by NortonDC at 10:48 AM on February 6, 2002
I'll probably see a picture of the Pope reading The Onion first.
posted by NortonDC at 10:48 AM on February 6, 2002
The whole world is watching.
The whole world is watching.
The whole world is watching.
posted by jpoulos at 10:56 AM on February 6, 2002
The whole world is watching.
The whole world is watching.
posted by jpoulos at 10:56 AM on February 6, 2002
It brings to mind a Groucho Marx quote (that someone else probably wrote) that goes something like, "I'm not sure I would want to belong to a club that would have ME as a member."
posted by Danf at 11:24 AM on February 6, 2002
posted by Danf at 11:24 AM on February 6, 2002
This is the second time one of my posts has been mentioned in a newspaper. They're after me.
posted by swift at 1:00 PM on February 6, 2002
posted by swift at 1:00 PM on February 6, 2002
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by rev- at 8:35 AM on February 6, 2002