MetaFilter

Some of the stuff that shows up in the "recently resolved" feed only seems resolved in the asker's mind.

I feel your pain. Some of the things that show up as questions don't really seem to be questions, either.
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 7:50 AM on September 1, 2010

As Horace Rumpole noted, we do a reminder email automatically one month out. That seems like a decent compromise and has produce some results; we're not going to send further pokes after that because we don't really want to annoy people.

Your two best bets for watching for updates to questions in general are to subscribe to the resolved tag (or just check in on that page manually now and then, I suppose) and to watch the Answered tab from the front page of askme.... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by cortex at 7:09 AM on September 1, 2010

Matt's answer in a previous thread may be of interest:

We send out an automated email 30 days after you ask a question asking for a followup, and we explain the "resolved" tag that can be added to it.

You should follow the resolved tag, it's pretty cool and sometimes stuff that is a year or two old pop up in the feed. Check out the Answered tab of Ask MeFi's front page, and in the sidebar are all the recently resolved... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by Horace Rumpole at 4:51 AM on September 1, 2010

Yeah the term is really recent because it sort of touched on something we've seen but had a hard time explaining. Someone posts a link to something that makes everyone go GRAR and there's really nothing to talk about, just a bunch of people being mad together: recreational outrage. I'm trying to remember which site it came from... Kos? Huffpo? TPM?

MeFi isn't a generally political site and while the majority of our members are American, there are a lot of other parts of... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 10:09 PM on August 30, 2010

I should really just let jessamyn/cortex handle this one, but ...

From the Guidelines page:A good post to MetaFilter is something that meets the following criteria: most people haven't seen it before, there is something interesting about the content on the page, and it might warrant discussion from others.
...
A good thread values uniqueness over novelty.The part of that relevant to the posts you point out is the 'warrant discussion from others'.... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by carsonb at 9:54 PM on August 30, 2010

It's a term that mathowie mentioned recently which is sort of a replacement for "look at these assholes" when there's a news article posted which is basically "this really shitty thing is happening in this one place in America" and everyone reads the post and says "that sucks!" and then they sort of sit around in the thread and get angry about it and usually fight with each other. Micropolitics about individual states can sometimes be interesting news, but they're... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 9:50 PM on August 30, 2010

I clicked through the link smackfu linked to above and read through it, very interesting I must say, and found this posted by jessamyn:

So, maybe we haven't been clear about that aspect of it. The percentage of anonymous questions relative to all questions overall is creeping up [it hovers at around 10% now] and we don't want to see that number getting much higher. There's a slight ding to the community aspect of the site when questions are asked anonymously.... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by TheBones at 4:09 PM on August 30, 2010

We approve maybe 80% of the anonymous posts. Usually my thought process goes like this.

- Has the AnonyMe queue been full lately? If so, we'll be a little more hardline on approval, otherwise we'll be more lax. This question, yeah, it's really not a great AnonyMe question, but I was in "benefit of the doubt" mood.
- Is the question going to be a total trainwreck? We're approving fewer trainwreck posts lately.
- Does the asker include... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 7:44 AM on August 30, 2010

Yeah, this one is pretty strange - I'm guessing it's a celebrity chef with their own restaurant, TV show and line of books that finally broke down and admitted they just can't fake it any more.

Also, the standard answer to your question is to trust the mods are using their modly powers for good and not for evil. I can't say I entirely agree with the reasoning, but they seem to have enough grar in their lives already without people trying to second-guess their every decision.
posted to MetaTalk by Dr Dracator at 7:40 AM on August 30, 2010

In the Talmudic lore of Metafilter it is related that there was once a time when mathowie, in his infinite wisdom, even chose to allow a self-link – and told the bewildered crowd that it was a quality self-link. Why, asked the Mefi Rabbis, was a self-link allowed? – for, they said, a self-link is well known to be the most serious of Metafilter violations! – and allowed by not a lesser mod than the mod of mods, mathowie!... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by koeselitz at 10:10 AM on August 29, 2010

Are they allowed to stand if their quality (entertainment value) outweighs their evil (annoyance)?

Usually, yes. There is an open MeTa thread about this, actually. If we think it's SEO bullshit, we'll nix it. I don't think this is what divabat is up to. People may still think the post sucks anyhow [I haven't really looked at it] but the fact that it's an ad is not in and of itself a reaso to delete it.
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 9:57 AM on August 29, 2010

So what exactly is the current policy on FPPs that straight up link to advertising (and nothing else)? Are they allowed to stand if their quality (entertainment value) outweighs their evil (annoyance)?

Pretty much, yeah. Honestly, I find invasive or annoying advertising bothersome but that's a personal feeling. I find clever advertising clever if I don't have to watch it twenty times in a row. Neither of these things really has anything to do with... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by cortex at 9:55 AM on August 29, 2010

He's annoying people that he has decided deserve to be annoyed, and he's getting no small amount of gratification from it.

He will fit in well here.
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 1:40 PM on August 28, 2010

If we set some sort of standard (e.g., last post/comment was over a year ago,) could we get some stats about users' final posts? Like, average age of the poster, length of post/comment, etc?

Yep, that works pretty well actually. As others have already mentioned, the Infodump doesn't tell us if an account is disabled or not. But a list of userids whose last post or comment happened more than 1 year ago is easily generated, and picks up people who simply... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by FishBike at 8:03 PM on August 27, 2010

Before Cortex closes up this thread, I'll offer you a warning, a word to the wise, luke. MetaFilter responds well to temperate discussion. But this is like an Old West town populated by retired gunslingers -- many who have been shooting it out in threads elsewhere for decades. A lot are like me -- I've tried to hang up my pistols and treat the Web as a place where reasoned people have reasoned discussions.

That being said, when somebody comes into the saloon with both... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by Astro Zombie at 12:42 PM on August 25, 2010

They won't be able to.

Hi. I work here. Keeping this place from falling over is my job. I don't really like deleting stuff from the site and tend to avoid it wherever possible, something that anyone who knows me well from spending time here can tell you. There's discussion of my misgivings about it even in this thread.

And I don't sit around pulling rank on a regular basis because I don't think it's a particularly helpful... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by cortex at 8:43 AM on August 25, 2010

I don't really see how much thinner you can get than single-link-pepsi-tube with a previously, to be honest.

I don't think it's a great post by any means, don't get me wrong. But, again, this is sort of results-may-vary, element-of-chance thing even all else aside based on how around we all are on any given day and so on. I'm super distracted by houseguests and family stuff right now or I might have taken a closer look at it earlier and decided to... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by cortex at 3:48 PM on August 24, 2010

Isn't that the exact opposite of the normal policy? Good discussion or no, if it's a bad post it's a bad post is the rule as I understand it.

No, it's more that the official policy is that "but the discussion was good" is not an automatic save on a post. It's more of a "yes, we did delete your thread" response to "but the discussion was good!" complaints, not a self-contained black-and-white statement about how every... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by cortex at 3:01 PM on August 24, 2010

I guess I was aiming for silently supporting the moderators and protesting whiny call outs. Some of these call out/flame wars are tiresome, so instead of increasing the chatter I was looking for quick Flag it and move on.

I appreciate the idea of being supportive, but we don't really have any need for some additional channel on that front. If you want to give us private feedback, flag it under the current system, or write us an email if your take is... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by cortex at 9:16 PM on August 21, 2010

This isn't a joke but a legitimate request. I'm curious as to why the answer is no, after all the flag is only seen by the moderators, or am I missing something? How are flags handled? Does it generate an email? If that is the case I could see how that would be a pain.

I guess I was aiming for silently supporting the moderators and protesting whiny call outs. Some of these call out/flame wars are tiresome, so instead of increasing the chatter I was looking for quick... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by darkmatter at 8:59 PM on August 21, 2010

I left a note I should never have to leave in a MeFi thread "quit calling each other rapists." If the thread can't self-correct we should probably axe it. I'm going to try to find cortex.
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 10:03 AM on August 21, 2010

[few comments removed - this is now in MetaTalk. Please take side derails there and QUIT CALLING EACH OTHER RAPISTS. I can not believe I have to say this here.]
posted to MetaFilter by jessamyn at 10:01 AM on August 21, 2010

I really hate to get involved in this, because I don't care about the art of comedy particularly and Steve Roye is frankly kind of annoying, but since nobody else is saying it and I think it should be said: that thread and this show off MeFi at its worst. Roye is not anyone's idea of a MeFite; he writes poorly, runs a business that doesn't involve computers, and doesn't have much apparent interest in other things (like Apple products, literature and music, or the latest YouTube craze) that lots... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by languagehat at 10:37 AM on August 20, 2010

I promise you that it is not as revealing of my blood pressure as you would imagine.

I promise that I am not telling you to take a walk because I think you are angry or in need of exercise. I feel that you could benefit from some perspective. Flagging things in MeTa as breaking the guidelines also indicates that you are unclear how MetaTalk works. We almost never delete comments here. You'd have to be threatening bodily harm to someone to get a... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 7:53 AM on August 19, 2010

jessamyn, et al.: you are engaging in bad faith.

You very seriously need to take a walk. If you are saying that you know how the site works better than all the people who have contributed to the thread here, and those who flagged the post, then you have a misunderstanding both of how MetaTalk works and how the site in general works.

If you think it should work differently, this is the place to talk about that. That said,... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 7:28 AM on August 19, 2010

jessamyn, et al.: you are engaging in bad faith.

It's really not good to argue that one of the mods is engaging in bad faith. They've put in years of time and effort which clearly show the exact opposite. She may have made a mistake, but accusing her of engaging in bad faith is over the top.
posted to MetaTalk by nomadicink at 7:10 AM on August 19, 2010

If it's snarky I can understand this being an issue for you.

If it's not an answer to the question, it's an issue for me. We see this specifically in certain threads in AskMe

- dating threads
- drinking threads
- my family is crazy threads

Where people's only contribution is something like "You're just reacting to this because you (are|are not) from a culture that... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 7:46 AM on August 19, 2010

AskMe is not about how much you respect or disrespect the asker. It is about answering the question.

Unfortunately, part of the problem is that the OP specifically asked "Did you lose your respect for the peeper, or do you generally assume that most dudes are trying to peek at you whether you notice or not?" and followed up with the killer: "Any advice would be valued."

I feel like we need to do that thing... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 7:19 AM on August 19, 2010

I have this priceless image in my head of Jess seeing this in the anonymous queue, going "Fuuuuuuuuu," taking a deep breath, approving the post and then sitting there perched over her keyboard in a WWII style tin helmet waiting for the incoming hate mortars to start landing around her mod trench.

Welcome to my yesterday. Just a heads up that these threads going badly [anonymous AskMe questions that are not worded so great about a touchy... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 6:39 AM on August 19, 2010

Certain people just can't help themselves.

This whole "don't be jerks to each other" thing goes both ways.
posted to MetaTalk by cortex at 10:53 AM on August 18, 2010

Actually, that was GIR, one of the channel bots, regurgitating something at random based on a prompt that happened just before you joined. He's a horrible little weirdo but he's got a markoving brain and so I can't help but love him.

Not that it's precisely a misleading characterization of some of the channel contents or anything. But, yeah, no one was actually specifically intending to encourage anyone to fuck their butt poops at that time.... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by cortex at 8:52 AM on August 18, 2010

There are definitely times at work when I find myself thinking "if the MetaFilter moderators can respond to this sort of foolishness without losing their collective shit, then so can I" as kind of a motivational technique. So there are definitely things they do here that I find worthy of trying to emulate.

On the other hand, I am sort of finding myself inserting a lot of softening verbiage in what I write as a way of pre-defusing an otherwise potentially... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by FishBike at 6:25 PM on August 17, 2010

When I ran a bbs back in the 90's, we had this one user who was fixated on lithium. Every post he made was about lithium. Every person, he thought, could benefit from the use of lithium. He could -- and did -- spend hours writing about his one favorite topic, to the exclusion of everything else. Such focus on one subject, to the exclusion of everything else, is not only unhealthy for the person in question, but takes little consideration for the very people he was trying to persuade or enlighten.... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by crunchland at 6:56 PM on August 17, 2010

I don't want to say something like "The three-year old girl didn't choose to go or understand the risk of losing her father"

The best way to not say something is not to say it.
posted to MetaFilter by jessamyn at 9:20 PM on August 16, 2010

This sounds like pretty classic attention-seeking behavior.

You've bought into the persona he's created - bizarre, possibly violent, and unpredictable.

These are fair assessments and may be right on the mark. However, being a moderator of a large group myself, I've learned that the inescapable truth is this: sociopathy happens. Sometimes they're not attention-starved shlemiels, or egotistic douches -- they're misfits... [more]
posted to Ask MetaFilter by Opal at 11:23 AM on August 16, 2010 marked best answer

However, being a moderator of a large group myself, I've learned that the inescapable truth is this: sociopathy happens.

Indeed. At the point at which you are using up a ton of your resources dealing with someone who is a poor group member in the first place, you need to find systems that will assist you in doing the job you're supposed to be doing. We deal with this occasionally on MeFi [different from IRL meetups but I have no idea if this maybe is... [more]
posted to Ask MetaFilter by jessamyn at 11:36 AM on August 16, 2010 marked best answer

OP here. I wrestled with the post idea for a while before making it. Hell, I almost made the title "Singer Assaulted on Stage" just to steer it away from the fact that it had to do with juggalos and Ms. Tequila specifically. But it wasn't a good post and I halfway realized that when I had to follow it up with an editorial comment. That does not a good FPP make.

The other half came when I saw the first few comments. There wasn't any fodder for discussion. It... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by griphus at 9:20 AM on August 16, 2010

...and now they'll do the same thing and harder next time.

If that is what you honestly think then please make an argument for it. If you really think that we're just being duped by a small coterie of individuals who act in unison to keep pop culture topics off of the front page, I'd say you're giving us barely any credit for knowing how the site works, ow the users operate, or knowing how to support and implement policies and guidelines. I get that... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 10:00 AM on August 16, 2010

Poster has agreed the deletion was justified. Can this stupid thing be closed up now?
posted to MetaTalk by languagehat at 9:51 AM on August 16, 2010

the coddling of anti-pop culture threadshitting and general arseyness on the part of the snobs by the the mods

Well it goes both ways. We let too many Lady Gaga posts stand and then it's all "What is this site, TMZ???" There's a balance, honestly. We delete a lot of "Oh do I need a TV to understand this?" threadshitting and there is an awful lot of pop culture that makes it to the front page and happily stays there. If you think this is a larger... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 9:39 AM on August 16, 2010

Jessamyn uses the Jessamyn tag too

Only around my apartment, but mostly I just have post-its that say MINE.

I think the larger point is that unless you really think I'm doing something that is extra-problematic, it's better to frame this stuff as "why are the guidelines the way they are?" and not "why is jessamyn screwing up?" unless you think I am screwing up in which case it's probably better to be... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 8:47 AM on August 16, 2010

WCityMike, you know how MetaTalk works, so I'm surprised you dropped this thread 3 hours ago and haven't returned to at least explain what specifically you found problematic and why you think the deletion is wrong. If you want more of an explanation, you have to at least state clearly what the problem is. If your intention wasn't to get any sort of clarification but to just rail on one moderator, that's equally disappointing.
posted to MetaTalk by mathowie at 8:25 AM on August 16, 2010

Good deletion. Not an interesting event, or link to the event, or post presentation. Just lowbrow filler. We can do better.
posted to MetaTalk by deern the headlice at 8:13 AM on August 16, 2010

Would it be useful to also have that in the deletion reason? Something like "Look at these assholes is such a bad idea (this post had 24 flags when it was deleted) --jessamyn".

Oh heck no. We try to keep direct references to flags to a minimum as it is and even at that it remains a sometimes contentious issue. Plugging that stuff into a deletion automatically is just asking for three or four new vectors of not-good in discussions.
posted to MetaTalk by cortex at 8:11 AM on August 16, 2010

Good deletion reasons provide feedback.

There was feedback here. Honestly, I feel like the "I don't have a problem with the deletion per se but I dislike the deletion reason" discussions we sometimes end up having aren't all that great because there's not a whole lot to say about it (they're short by design, generally off the cuff, and we're available for elaboration by email if you just want some clarification) and it's a tertiary bit of... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by cortex at 8:09 AM on August 16, 2010

The Straight Dope boards call these kinds of threads "Recreational Outrage" and confine them to their dumping ground for suck, The Barbeque Pit. And even within The Pit, they label them so people are aware they're more sucky than the usual suck.

Absent the ability to double label them as stupid, I'm fine with not having Recreational Outrage posts at all.
posted to MetaTalk by jacquilynne at 7:52 AM on August 16, 2010

I removed the "jessamyn" tag from this post, I'm not sure what it was doing there. I'm one of a small team of moderators and while I made this decision, unless you really think that I'm some sort of bad actor, it's a site decision. If what you're saying is that I've gone rogue or something, that better be crystal clear in your explanation.

I'm not sure if juggalos need to be added ot the list of "what MeFi does badly" but griphus added in his first... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 7:41 AM on August 16, 2010

The point is, the declaration that something is a "look at these assholes" post is subjective and vague, and doesn't help the poster or other members craft better posts.

In this case I disagree, since the deletion reason specifically states the reason the author gave for making the post was weak.

I took that to mean, don't make posts just to point out how horrible something is. The post probably would have gone done... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by nomadicink at 6:03 AM on August 16, 2010

My current copy of the infodump is several weeks out of date but it shows 153858 AskMe posts, of which 16429 (10.68%) had the first answer marked as best.
posted to MetaTalk by Rhomboid at 10:17 PM on August 12, 2010

We clamp down on people dispensing legal advice

What? No we don't. I'd prefer people didn't ask questions about prescriptions as well. We generally don't approve anonymous questions about prescriptions [especially lately]. People should be calling their doctors, but for whatever reason, they don't. However, they'd be asking their friends if they weren't asking here and our general feeling is they're likely to get better advice here.... [more]
posted to MetaTalk by jessamyn at 8:55 AM on August 12, 2010