VideoFilter Debate: Take 42

February 15, 2007 9:57 PM

VideoFilter Debate: Take 42 - I like Tom Waits. A lot. But YouTube and a link to Wikipedia? Hardly the best of the web.
posted by aladfar to Etiquette/Policy at 9:57 PM (30 comments total)

I know it's been discussed at length, but I think it's a discussion worth having.
posted by aladfar at 9:57 PM on February 15, 2007

People are posting YouTube videos to MeFi now?
posted by ikkyu2 at 10:06 PM on February 15, 2007

I thought so too even though I participated in the thread, to be honest, but given my recent posting history in relation to Youtube music videos, I thought it best to refrain from criticism.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:06 PM on February 15, 2007

MetaFilter should consist solely of links to Tom Waits, zombies, and grandfather clocks. The post you link to conforms to that standard, so what's exactly the problem?
posted by Meatbomb at 10:06 PM on February 15, 2007 [1 favorite]

Also, 'best of the web' is deprecated.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:07 PM on February 15, 2007 [1 favorite]

You know, I'd be tempted to agree, but a video that was made in '79, won an Academy Award for technical achievement and still hasn't been commercially released due to legal shenanigans is more than your standard bar-lowering YouTube post.
posted by arto at 10:18 PM on February 15, 2007 [2 favorites]

I did not know that. I'm definitely going to watch it when I get home in a couple of hours, then. That information if included would have easily put the post over the bar, in my humble.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:21 PM on February 15, 2007

I agree arto, it is cool. Many YouTube links on MeFi are cool. To be honest, it all seems very much in keeping with the posting guidelines:

"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."

But anyone typing "Tom Waits" into either YouTube or Wikipedia would have found this content immediately. It's very much like posting a question to AskMe that could be easily answered with a Google search.
posted by aladfar at 10:33 PM on February 15, 2007

Metafilter: Tom Waits, zombies, and grandfather clocks.
posted by Astro Zombie at 10:39 PM on February 15, 2007

How is user no. 904 the one posting this?
posted by hototogisu at 10:45 PM on February 15, 2007

But anyone typing "Tom Waits" into either YouTube or Wikipedia would have found this content immediately.

Sure, if he or she bothered to wade through four pages of results to get there.

It's very much like posting a question to AskMe that could be easily answered with a Google search.

I don't think so. People asking questions know, more or less, what they're looking for. It wouldn't have occurred to me to look for a rotoscoped Tom Waits narrative music video, because it's non-obvious that there should be such a thing.

I don't think much of Youtube posts generally, but this is hardly the example I'd choose to call out.
posted by IshmaelGraves at 10:45 PM on February 15, 2007

more like west of the beb
posted by quarter waters and a bag of chips at 10:56 PM on February 15, 2007

Good content, bad framing.
posted by dhammond at 11:34 PM on February 15, 2007

This is a poor and unnecessary callout. The video is enough of an oddity to get a pass, and if you're not interested in Tom Waits, it's easy enough to skip past.
posted by MrMustard at 12:46 AM on February 16, 2007

I am very upset!
posted by shmegegge at 2:35 AM on February 16, 2007

FIAMO
posted by slimepuppy at 3:17 AM on February 16, 2007

But anyone typing "Tom Waits" into either YouTube or Wikipedia would have found this content immediately

I've never understood this argument. You could find [insert your all-time favorite MeFi link here] by doing the same search the poster did. So what? The poster found something cool on the web and wanted to share it. We could have found the same thing, but we didn't, and we're glad to be told about it. Where's the problem?

And will everyone shut the fuck up about YouTube already? It's just another content-delivery system.
posted by languagehat at 5:16 AM on February 16, 2007

Wot languagehat said. I would never have seen that very, very cool video without the post.
posted by fish tick at 5:35 AM on February 16, 2007

won an Academy Award for technical achievement

The pedant in me wants to say that the technical achievement itself won the oscar not the video.
posted by dobbs at 6:13 AM on February 16, 2007

A good post to MetaFilter is something that meets the following criteria: most people haven't seen it before

Check.

there is something interesting about the content on the page

Check

and it might warrant discussion from others.

Check.
posted by juiceCake at 6:30 AM on February 16, 2007

I have never had any use for hall monitors.
posted by Divine_Wino at 8:14 AM on February 16, 2007

I thought about adding more linkage to Tom Waits videos, and discussing why the video was worth watching, but most of the information I wanted to use to explicate the link was on the sidebar of the youtube. I opted instead to keep the link short, figuring a one-line teaser would be easy to skip over if you are not a Tom Waits fan.
Also, to be honest (Mea Culpa) I would have put more effort into it if it weren't Tax season, and I weren't catching up from 3 weeks being sick.
posted by BrotherCaine at 9:11 AM on February 16, 2007

Please don't jump down Aladfar's throat. He was right that I could have put more effort into framing the link. I felt that way when I posted, and that probably should have been a clue to do more work.
posted by BrotherCaine at 9:15 AM on February 16, 2007

Wot languagehat said. I would never have seen that very, very cool video without the post.

I would never have seen that very, very cool video without this stupid callout. Which makes me kind of conflicted
posted by timeistight at 9:43 AM on February 16, 2007 [1 favorite]

I didn't mean this as a callout, nor do I have hall monitor aspirations. I just wanted to further the discussion of the sometimes awkward relationship between YouTube and MeFi. Part of the reason I chose this post is because, as made plain in the post and my comments, is that I do like the content. That's part of what made me feel a bit conflicted about it.

As you may have noticed, this is only the third post I've ever made to MeTa. I'm not in the habit complaining about minutiae.
posted by aladfar at 9:58 AM on February 16, 2007

I just wanted to further the discussion of the sometimes awkward relationship between YouTube and MeFi.

I don't think that everyone thinks that there is an awkward relationship. I'm sorry I called you a hall monitor, I am irked/amused by the way in which some people seem to think that there should be some specific method of content delivery that metafilter "allows".

If someone links to some stupid webpage with fratboy jokes and spyware ads on it, there never seems to be an endless discussion of Mefi's awkward relationship with HTTP or Apache server software.

It seems counterproductive to discuss the problem as Youtube itself, although I am perfectly content to while away the rest of Friday chattering about it.
posted by Divine_Wino at 1:01 PM on February 16, 2007

This is a poor and unnecessary callout.

If just the YouTube video was linked and Tom Waits's name went unlinked, I would agree. It's those lazy ass Wikipedia links that deserve calling out.
posted by y2karl at 2:15 PM on February 16, 2007

Honestly I don't see what's so great about one Tom Waits video. I would have preferred some rant blog post about how much corporate america sucks for supressing the artt that is Tom Waits over a wikipedia link to an artist who might as well be John Lennon for the level of fame and admiration acheived.
posted by shownomercy at 3:02 PM on February 16, 2007

The entire internet is becoming useless if your computer is not capable of sound and too slow for video (as is mine). I currently have to ignore nearly half of the links on the front page. I feel kind of... disabled.

But it's my problem, I'm not expecting any sympathy here. I'm just saying, what would you do if you couldn't watch all the cool videos? besides, of course, getting an able bodied computer? You'd be grumpy as fuck.
posted by bobobox at 4:34 PM on February 16, 2007

I haven't seen the video yet but I sympathize with bobobox, who might be too smart to spend 1/10 of HIS income on a DSL connection— to get good use of the hardware I had to save up for for several months five years ago. Sometimes I think life was much better when I spent my net.time on Usenet with a dialup shell account on a RAM-deprived 486 running Slackware. I still say any really important content can be easily gotten with Lynx.
posted by davy at 10:11 AM on February 17, 2007