What gives with the deletion?

July 13, 2007 11:54 AM

"This post was deleted for the following reason: Wingers, wingnuts, wikipedia, wikipedia. I'm not sure where the quality content is supposed to be, here. -- cortex" Can we get a ruling on what constitutes "quality content" given the crap linked to in some of these posts? Or is it just that gossipy "outing" posts can only be made about Republicans?
posted by loquax to Etiquette/Policy at 11:54 AM (228 comments total)

If you read the "wingnut" (or is it the "winger"?) post, you'll see the links to MEMRI that document and have video of the statement by Ahmad Jibril, Secretary-General of the PFLP General Command. Is he right? Is he lying? I have no idea. But he said it. And Arafat's death of AIDS and/or his potential homosexuality is just as political relevant as the outing of "hypocritical" republicans, maybe even more so.

So then is Powerline, a widely read blog (and certainly with more credibility than some of the random - and now shuttered - linked to in the other posts) verboten on Metafilter? Is MEMRI? Are HuffPo links quality? If this is reposted with the links pointing directly at the MEMRI content will it stay up?
posted by loquax at 11:55 AM on July 13, 2007

The posting looked like something rejected from Reddit, where links to obscure blogs and partisan websites are regularly touted as unbiased and unquestionable news sources.

Metafilter deserves better.

I fully agree with Cortex.
posted by humblepigeon at 12:06 PM on July 13, 2007

Editor: This is a joke, right? I mean this is the stupidest thing I've ever read!
Homer: What's wrong with it?
Editor: You keep using words like "pasghetti" and "momatoes," you make numerous threatening references to the UN, and at the end you repeat the words "Screw Flanders" over and over again.
posted by blue_beetle at 12:08 PM on July 13, 2007 [7 favorites]

Arafat's death of AIDS and/or his potential homosexuality is just as political relevant as the outing of "hypocritical" republicans

Outing someone who is dead is much much less socially relevant than outing someone who is living. People read too much into the reasons for deletion. It was a bad post.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:12 PM on July 13, 2007

Outing someone who is dead is much much less socially relevant than outing someone who is living.

This is great... can we learn more about what constitutes appropriate outing on Metafilter? Are there guidelines? Will it be okay if I make a post about Arafat's potential death of AIDS without the (allegedly) homophobic overtones?
posted by Krrrlson at 12:14 PM on July 13, 2007

If there are solid, interesting source documents that are the heart and soul of a post, they should really be what the post is made out of. This was just as described: a link from a partisan media outlet, an angry blurb-intro with gems like "As with so many basic facts about this utterly vile human being...", and two wikipedia links to round it out. It was a lousy post; I don't care who it's about.

So, no, it has not a goddam thing to do with "Republicans" or not.

And we've said it before: the fact that not every shitty link ever posted gets deleted is not a good reason for us to not ever delete any shitty links. It's a day-by-day, catch-as-catch-can process.
posted by cortex (staff) at 12:17 PM on July 13, 2007

Yeah, if you go back in time to 2002, it should be an instant classic.
posted by Plutor at 12:17 PM on July 13, 2007

Well, duh, a quality post does not have links to Wingers, wingnuts, wikipedia, wikipedia.
posted by The Deej at 12:18 PM on July 13, 2007

Outing someone who is dead is much much less socially relevant than outing someone who is living. People read too much into the reasons for deletion. It was a bad post.

Except that the dead person is probably infinitely more geopolitically relevant in general that the random outed congresspeople that some around here seem to take great joy in.

It's a day-by-day, catch-as-catch-can process.

Fair enough, if you agree that the HuffPo and half the "politics" websites linked to here are also "partisan media outlets" who make it policy to start every post with an "angry blurb intro" about our favourite administration.
posted by loquax at 12:21 PM on July 13, 2007

can we learn more about what constitutes appropriate outing on Metafilter?

I was responding to loquax's bizarre assertion not creating policy guidelines.

Starting off a thread about Arafat calling him a terrorist and saying that someone said he died of AIDS without any other decent links and two Wikipedia links could be a textbook "how to make a crappy post to MetaFilter" example. I'm sure there is a better way to get the same information across, though my personal opinion is that these "news flash!" posts aren't generally done well, regardless of whether they could be or not.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:22 PM on July 13, 2007

I found the original post to be offensive in that it conflates HIV/AIDS as being a "gay disease."
posted by ericb at 12:22 PM on July 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

Please repost a quality post about Winger, though. Thank you.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:23 PM on July 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

Needs more badgers.
posted by blue_beetle at 12:24 PM on July 13, 2007

The post sucked. Word.
posted by chunking express at 12:27 PM on July 13, 2007

I just came out for some air to find that Metafilter is censoring conservatives again. Surprise, surprise!
posted by Anne Coulter's Butt Plug at 12:30 PM on July 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

So, no, it has not a goddam thing to do with "Republicans" or not.

I sincerely doubt that. My hunch is that you deleted this post because you got numerous complaints and flags and didn't want to deal with the pitchfork mob. Equally crappy posts about Republicans don't generate nearly as much outrage around here, and therefore get through quite often. Frankly, I fully understand the desire to avoid confrontation, but don't try to claim that there is a consistent policy here.
posted by Krrrlson at 12:32 PM on July 13, 2007

Starting off a thread about Arafat calling him a terrorist and saying that someone said he died of AIDS without any other decent links and two

So editorialize about Bush or Cheney, no problem, but calling Arafat a terrorist isn't kosher?

saying that someone said he died of AIDS without any other decent links and two Wikipedia links

The Powerline link had links to MEMRI with video and a transcript of the other gentleman's assertion.

I'm not saying it was a great post by any means, but neither is 95% of the politics stuff that gets posted here. Especially the other "outing" threads that were linked above. If you want to say that bias didn't come into this and this post just happened to be the one you saw while missing the others, fine. But from the outside, it sure doesn't seem like a similar post about Carter asserting that Nixon died of AIDS would have been deleted.
posted by loquax at 12:35 PM on July 13, 2007

It wasn't about the politics, it was the lame source. I delete left-wing posts based on nothing more there hearsay often. It's a political news post that I would have kept around if it had a real source and some proof.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 12:37 PM on July 13, 2007

Nixon's dead?
posted by Razzle Bathbone at 12:38 PM on July 13, 2007

Carter's not?
posted by felix betachat at 12:43 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

IMHO, "Fellow Terrorist Says" was editorializing enough to warrant nuking the post.
posted by solid-one-love at 12:45 PM on July 13, 2007

I'm starting a service. For 5 bucks, I'll post on my blog that someone is gay, and you can link to my blog from MetaFilter. Plus 3 bucks for the t-word, and 10 bucks for an elaborate angry-blurb intro.

Heck, if you pay for it, I'll even give the blog its own domain name -- sites with their own domain name have much more credibility than .blogspot.com!
posted by qvantamon at 12:47 PM on July 13, 2007

Or is it just that gossipy "outing" posts can only be made about Republicans?

I find many of the Republican outings interesting because the people turn out to be actively involved in trying to curb the rights of homosexuals.

Anyway, comparing those posts to this one is a bit of a disrespect. Having AIDS doesn't make you gay. You're not an idiot, so I am sure you know this. People who haven't figured that out probably don't deserve to have their sites on the front page of Mefi.
posted by chunking express at 12:58 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

MEMRI is pretty often connected with Israeli intelligence. This is possibly not the best source of unbiased info re: Arafat.
posted by nevercalm at 1:02 PM on July 13, 2007

YOU KNOW WHO ELSE DIED OF AIDS IN A CLOSET? THAT'S RIGHT: CORTEX.
posted by quonsar at 1:04 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

calling Arafat a terrorist isn't kosher?

Menachem Begin, Yosef Avni, Yisrael Levi... now those were some Kosher Terrorists.
posted by Fuzzy Monster at 1:05 PM on July 13, 2007

It's a political news post that I would have kept around if it had a real source and some proof.

MEMRITV Video - #1507 on the list

Transcript

Both were linked to within the "Fellow Terrorist says" link in the original post. Is the issue that an extra click was required to get to the primary source? Then how about reinstating and swapping the two links above for the first two in the post?

In defense of the subject matter, if you think that even an unfounded accusation of Arafat dying of AIDS with all of the homosexuality connotations it comes with isn't relevant when Fatah is fighting a civil war with Hamas, you aren't paying attention. This isn't about whether or not neocons hate Arafat or gays or whatever, it's about what the impact could be in the West Bank. And unfortunately for most people, AIDS means gay, so good for all of us that we recognize it doesn't. I bet the Palestinians aren't quite so enlightened. This is all besides the fact that many sources have claimed to observe him having sex with men over the years (which, admittedly, was not in the original post, but makes the AIDS assertion that much more inflammatory in the region). Personally, I don't care if he was gay or died of AIDS.

"MEMRI is pretty often connected with Israeli intelligence. This is possibly not the best source of unbiased info re: Arafat."

It was a video of the man speaking, and a translation. Are you saying that the translation was wrong? Any arabic speakers in the house? The Israelis neither made the video nor broadcast it. MEMRI recorded it and translated it. How can a link to Israeli intelligence possibly be relevant, even if true?
posted by loquax at 1:05 PM on July 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

The Deej : Well, duh, a quality post does not have links to Wingers, wingnuts, wikipedia, wikipedia.

*Sets off to create a post discussing military pilots, aircraft parts, and at least two wiki citations.*
posted by quin at 1:10 PM on July 13, 2007

The ReturnOfI'veGotAPeaUnderMyMattress!!!Filter
posted by y2karl at 1:11 PM on July 13, 2007

Loquax, it was a shitty post. That second link is obviously anti Afarat that it's pretty impossible to take anything it says or links to seriously.

The links you posted, showing the "obvious" unfairness, were informative and better written. And any time you can point out hypocrisy in political figures is a good thing.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:12 PM on July 13, 2007

This isn't about whether or not neocons hate Arafat or gays or whatever, it's about what the impact could be in the West Bank. And unfortunately for most people, AIDS means gay, so good for all of us that we recognize it doesn't. I bet the Palestinians aren't quite so enlightened.

Imagine if!

Whatever it is you're getting at, it still doesn't offer any rationale for the content of that lame attempt at a shit-stirring post.
posted by veronica sawyer at 1:12 PM on July 13, 2007

Oh, Ok, make that TheReturnOfI'veGotAPeaUnderMyMattress!!!Filter
posted by y2karl at 1:14 PM on July 13, 2007

We're all a little gay.
posted by KokuRyu at 1:14 PM on July 13, 2007

So then is Powerline, a widely read blog (and certainly with more credibility than some of the random - and now shuttered - linked to in the other posts) verboten on Metafilter?

Random noises coming out of my ass have a closer relation to truth than Powerline.
posted by COBRA! at 1:16 PM on July 13, 2007 [5 favorites]

Loquax, it was a shitty post. That second link is obviously anti Afarat that it's pretty impossible to take anything it says or links to seriously.

Great. So then no problem with link substitution, right? And ensuring that all future posts link to only unbiased, sober, empirical analysis of the subject matter they deal with right?

Whatever it is you're getting at, it still doesn't offer any rationale for the content of that lame attempt at a shit-stirring post.

As opposed to the other ones I linked to? That all basically had a "ha ha, you're gay" punchline?

Oh, Ok, make that TheReturnOfI'veGotAPeaUnderMyMattress!!!Filter

Says the guy who concocted an elaborate ruse to out Dhoyt and his minions? Don't get me wrong though, that was great great fun back in the day.
posted by loquax at 1:22 PM on July 13, 2007

The Deej : Well, duh, a quality post does not have links to Wingers, wingnuts, wikipedia, wikipedia.

*Sets off to create a post discussing military pilots, aircraft parts, and at least two wiki citations.*
posted by quin

BAD POST!!!! Go to your closet!!!!
posted by The Deej at 1:22 PM on July 13, 2007

It was a video of the man speaking, and a translation. Are you saying that the translation was wrong? Any arabic speakers in the house? The Israelis neither made the video nor broadcast it. MEMRI recorded it and translated it. How can a link to Israeli intelligence possibly be relevant, even if true?

Just sayin.

Selective MEMRI
MEMRI tries a SLAPP

Places like Powerline and MEMRI rate about as high as Fox news. It's entirely your right, so feel free to read all the propaganda you want, but attempting to foist it on the MeFi community and then whining about it when it gets axed? C'mon.

In other news: Hillary Clinton eats babies, Barack Hussein Obama is named after Saddam and Osama, Iraq had WMDs and is connected to 911, Bill Clinton did it too and much worse, Democrats love terrorists, public health care encourages terrorism, they hate us for our freedom, etcetc.

And if Arafat died of AIDS......so?!!?? Would you be posting this if it turned out that he was assassinated by the Israelis? Didn't think so.
posted by nevercalm at 1:25 PM on July 13, 2007 [3 favorites]

Says the guy who concocted an elaborate ruse to out Dhoyt and his minions? Don't get me wrong though, that was great great fun back in the day.

So says the guy who's listed as a contact by dhoyt.....
posted by dersins at 1:29 PM on July 13, 2007

This is so unfair. UNFAIR. unfairunfairunfairunfairunfairunfairunfairunfairunfairunfairunfairunfairunfairunfairunfairunfairunfairunfairunfairunfair!
posted by OmieWise at 1:29 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

Great. So then no problem with link substitution, right?

It's been clearly stated anyone is free to repost the info, just with better links.

And ensuring that all future posts link to only unbiased, sober, empirical analysis of the subject matter they deal with right?

Bias is fine. Outright hatred probably isn't. This ain't rocket science, you know. If I want to tell you a story about Bob, but start off calling him a vile human being while saying "OMG HE WAS GAY AND.." (breathlessly) "...HE DIED OF AIDS" that throws any credibility I might have out the window.

Look, you're bitching and moaning about the unfairness of it all, when it's been said that better links were needed. You could have another go at the post or you could continue arguing about the terrible oppression of the Republicians. What's it going to be?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:35 PM on July 13, 2007

The idea that Arafat is some kind of hero of the left whose memory must be kept free of all stain is one of the more amazing, if rather inconsequential, fantasies of the self-deluding right; stemming, perhaps, I suppose, from the mind-destroying futility of trying to prevent people (and themselves) from realizing plain truths such as that Ronald Reagan was little better than a high grade moron, with policies to match.

If I didn't see it every day here and elsewhere, I would never have believed it was possible for so many to get bloody noses and loosened teeth when all they're doing is shadowboxing.
posted by jamjam at 1:35 PM on July 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

LOL Republicans.
posted by bardic at 1:42 PM on July 13, 2007

Look, here goes— It was a shitty post. It was newsfilter with a dash of outrage and some thin-sourcing back links. It was scurrilous GYOBFW material, not any sort of "best of the web" (however deprecated that standard is).

Trying to make it into an elaborate tu quoque ignores that it was bullshit and that tu quoque reasoning is fallacious.
posted by klangklangston at 1:44 PM on July 13, 2007

My hunch is that you deleted this post because you got numerous complaints and flags and didn't want to deal with the pitchfork mob.

Pitchfork mob? Is this something I'd have to listen to Animal Collective to know about?
posted by ludwig_van at 1:46 PM on July 13, 2007 [3 favorites]

And jeez, loquax, I could swear that you weren't always this deranged.
posted by klangklangston at 1:46 PM on July 13, 2007

Says the guy who concocted an elaborate ruse to out Dhoyt and his minions?

Is this a Harry Potter tie-in? Did you check them for snake tattoos?
posted by inigo2 at 1:47 PM on July 13, 2007

Isn't the Arafat thing old news (or old speculation, as far as I can tell), anyway? I heard a lot about this back in 2004 when he was in the hospital in France.

I found myself having odd arguments with conservative family members about it : "Okay, so Arafat did some shitty things and misused money, so hate him for that if you want, but don't hate him for (maybe) having sex with men! That's his personal choice, even if you hate him." I don't like Arafat, but I'm also not too keen on homophobia.
posted by needs more cowbell at 2:01 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

It was a Gaytastic! post and I'm glad it got axed. This AIDS-is-a-gay-cancer stuff from right-wing fantasy sites sucks.

Nickyskye puts together good posts so I'm sure this is the exception that proves the rule.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:11 PM on July 13, 2007

Look, you're bitching and moaning about the unfairness of it all, when it's been said that better links were needed. You could have another go at the post or you could continue arguing about the terrible oppression of the Republicians. What's it going to be?

Done! Have a good night all!
posted by loquax at 2:12 PM on July 13, 2007

That's the underlying "gotcha!" of the reason for this post's deletion: the posts cited as "crap" in the original "what gives?" were pretty much all posts calling out Republicans for being gay while finding electoral success partly because of their anti-gay stance. Which....fine. They're hypocrites, I'm all for it. You don't find too many people outing people who never mention other peoples' private lives. Larry Flynt was about to out this Vitter character because he was a hypocrite, not because he went to hookers.

Same with Arafat here. He was no hero to his people? Criticize him for that all you want. But he had AIDS? So what? How many people died of AIDS who weren't gay? And even if he was gay...again, who cares? It's not like he's the head of a massive political organization which makes no bones about hating gays while purportedly enjoying some man-lovin' himself.

This, last I checked, was not a gay-hatin' place. A homophobic post, no matter how subtle it might be, wasn't really ever going to make it.
posted by nevercalm at 2:16 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

Done! Have a good night all!

Except you're not done. You just reposted to the Blue and your starting up the whole Memri-is-a-reliable-source debate again.
posted by boubelium at 2:18 PM on July 13, 2007

MeFi

[SPOILER ALERT!]

The reconstituted post, born of spite, is still totally lame.


[END SPOILER]
posted by kosem at 2:19 PM on July 13, 2007

So then is Powerline, a widely read blog

Isn't Powerline some sort of Sport Select/Lotto 649 thing?
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 2:21 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

Only in Nigeria, I believe, where everyone gets lucky.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:23 PM on July 13, 2007

Why is this such a big deal to you, loquax? Did the OP of the deleted post contact you for help or something? Was that your other user name? What gives?
posted by EatTheWeek at 2:29 PM on July 13, 2007

Hey, did you guys hear that Freddie Mercury was gay, too? For real!
posted by COBRA! at 2:33 PM on July 13, 2007

Ellen DeGeneres, too!
posted by COBRA! at 2:35 PM on July 13, 2007

so is MEMRI a valid source or what? the memri links in the new post seem to be the only thing based on any sort of factual source.
posted by shmegegge at 2:36 PM on July 13, 2007

COBRA! - I heard K.D. Lang was totally teh gayxors! What will the West Bank think of that?
posted by EatTheWeek at 2:38 PM on July 13, 2007

"COBRA! - I heard K.D. Lang was totally teh gayxors! What will the West Bank think of that?"

Man, right now I'm having trouble thinking of a single lesbian musician who's better than 50/50 on making decent music. And don't say The Gossip, since they're only really good live.

For some reason, gay men seem to represent better than average... I mean, even just having gay sex for a while made Bowie's output better...
posted by klangklangston at 2:48 PM on July 13, 2007

klangklangston - Joan muthafuken Jett. I will love that dykey rock goddess til the day I die.
posted by EatTheWeek at 2:50 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

5:34 pm: loquax, get your own blog fuckwit.

Good work, loquax -- you successfully brought your turf war to the blue. This is exactly the kind of insightful discussion I come to MeFi for. Golf clap.
posted by ourobouros at 2:52 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

lesbian musician who's better than 50/50 on making decent music

Sleatter-Kinney are far from being the indie rock saviors they sometimes get portrayed as, especially here in the northwest, but they're a better-than-average rock band.

On the other hand, they're not all gay.
posted by dersins at 2:52 PM on July 13, 2007

The argument that AIDS → Gay is absolutely disgusting millions of people all over the world die from AIDS and you're essentially claiming that they are all homosexual or hypocritical as Arafat would have been if he contracted it from a man, rather then a woman. If Arafat really did die of AIDS he could easily have gotten it from a woman.
posted by delmoi at 2:55 PM on July 13, 2007

I'm still rooting for Missy Eliott. She'll bring up the average to at least a B or B+.
posted by ourobouros at 2:56 PM on July 13, 2007

The revised post is still not very interesting (to me), but I think loquax did a good job of improving it enough to avoid deletion. So good work, loquax.
posted by escabeche at 2:57 PM on July 13, 2007

Damn, I can only flag it once? But...but....there are SO MANY REASONS!!!
posted by nevercalm at 2:59 PM on July 13, 2007

Oh, yeah. I'll take The Runaways and Sleater-Kinney. I was never really all that into SK, but they're at about 60%. JJ is probably in the high 70s for the classic period.
posted by klangklangston at 3:00 PM on July 13, 2007

Whether MERMI is reliable is kind of beside the point. All they did was translate a report on Hezbollah TV so loquax things Hezbollah is reliable now?
posted by delmoi at 3:07 PM on July 13, 2007

I'll se your S-K and raise you a Magnetic Fields.
posted by ludwig_van at 3:11 PM on July 13, 2007

see, even.
posted by ludwig_van at 3:11 PM on July 13, 2007

When did Stephen Merrit become a lesbian?
posted by klangklangston at 3:12 PM on July 13, 2007

Oh, and it's Stephin isn't it? Man, if his great songs weren't so great, I'd never want anything to do with him...
posted by klangklangston at 3:15 PM on July 13, 2007

When did Stephen Merrit become a lesbian?

Ahem.

What, just because he writes almost all the music doesn't mean that there aren't other band members...
posted by dersins at 3:16 PM on July 13, 2007

Speaking of gays, loquax, isn't it time you flamed out?
posted by nasreddin at 3:16 PM on July 13, 2007 [3 favorites]

Anyone know the lesbian ratio of Bikini Kill?
posted by EatTheWeek at 3:20 PM on July 13, 2007

Oh, c'mon. That's like including Chris Vrenna in NIN.
posted by klangklangston at 3:21 PM on July 13, 2007

Le Tigre's probably around 66% gay (and 50% decent), whereas Bikini Kill seems to be predominantly straight now (though I honestly don't know enough about their bios to un-queer 'em).
posted by klangklangston at 3:28 PM on July 13, 2007

Considering how often the mods here have bent over backwards (and sometimes forwards) for the token wingers here, I enthusiastically applaud this deletion.
posted by wendell at 3:34 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

I don't think the new post is any better. Anyone else?
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 3:38 PM on July 13, 2007

Um... Kosem and I almost got into a productive discussion of MC Lyte, if that qualifies as "better."
posted by klangklangston at 3:39 PM on July 13, 2007

klangklang - Le Tigre! Man, I don't know what to make of that project. For every "Deceptacon" that makes me tap my toes and bob my head, there's a "Dyke March" that just confuses.
posted by EatTheWeek at 3:40 PM on July 13, 2007

jess - I'm sure posting it made loquax feel better.
posted by EatTheWeek at 3:42 PM on July 13, 2007

I don't think the new post is any better. Anyone else?

I don't. It's decidedly unfabulous.
posted by allen.spaulding at 3:42 PM on July 13, 2007

That post is totally gay.
posted by Meatbomb at 3:43 PM on July 13, 2007

Says the guy who concocted an elaborate ruse to out Dhoyt and his minions?

Huh? This makes no sense whatsoever. Dhoyt outed himself with his own stupidity. What elaborate ruse ? Someone pointed one sockpuppet out to me and I checked the other various self-referential aliases in dhoyt's sockpuppet pile on thread and called him on it. Mathowie picked up on that, slapped me down for the suggestion, and then checked the--all the same--isp's of said sockpuppets, wrote dhoyt and after dhoyt confessed, banned him. Matt then wrote me, apologized for the slap down and elaborated on the dhoyt sockpuppet army upon my Even jenleigh? All I did was spill the beans later on.

So says the guy who's listed as a contact by dhoyt.....

And who listed dhoyt as a contact up until...

Dhoyt/hall of robots also lists loquax as muse, let it be noted. Heh--10% of loquax's contacts are one guy.
posted by y2karl at 3:43 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

>I don't think the new post is any better. Anyone else?

I think it should be left as a testament to loquax's posting skills, with a nod to his/her sense of political decorum. Plus, it'll be one less reason for *them* to call MeFi a seething cesspit of communist repression.
posted by gsb at 3:44 PM on July 13, 2007

I don't think the new post is any better. Anyone else?

Best of the web of trust.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 3:45 PM on July 13, 2007

Yeah, but the thing about *them* is this:

fuck *them*.
posted by dersins at 3:45 PM on July 13, 2007

There aren't enough donkey balls for this post to.....well, yeah.

Rewording the original to eliminate the biased blog post to get to the biased primary source of the biased blog post reporting the rumor about an enemy of the guy who's floating the rumor? Hell, it almost merits a third (fourth? Does this count too?) post to detail the whole thing! Maybe on MetaChat.
posted by nevercalm at 3:49 PM on July 13, 2007

POST IS CLOSED DUE TO AIDS
posted by 31d1 at 3:54 PM on July 13, 2007

you'll see the links to MEMRI that document and have video of the statement by Ahmad Jibril...

"MEMRI...All alone in the moonlight, I can dream of the old days..." sung by Barbra Streisand. Now that's gay! (Oh, and Jewish, too!)
posted by ericb at 3:54 PM on July 13, 2007

Can we get a ruling on what constitutes "quality content"

Can we get a ruling on what is the meaning of life?

There are no black and white answers here and the judgment on whether to keep or delete is very difficult. Cortex takes a lot of heat on this, and frankly sometimes rightly so, but this is an enormously difficult task. Jess took a lot of heat at first too. I think it takes a year or two to get really good at this.
posted by caddis at 3:54 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

I can't believe that post was deleted. Who the hell do they think they are???

I kid...
posted by nevercalm at 4:02 PM on July 13, 2007

Second try got deleted? Pity, he seemed to be going in a good direction with his first comment, giving a wider view of things, but yeah, it was still a screed.

Jessamyn, your comment (I don't think the new post is any better. Anyone else?) comes off as cliquish, as if you're encouraging others to beat up on the post especially considering you're the admin who deleted the second post. Like I said, it probably wasn't your intention, but it looks kinda low.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:12 PM on July 13, 2007

This post was deleted for the following reason: this is stil a screed. fortunately there is already a MeTa thread for discussing it. -- jessamyn

I will wait patiently for when you apply your newfound standards to the next Rethuglican screed to hit the blue. Or not.

Pathetic.

Dhoyt/hall of robots also lists loquax as muse, let it be noted. Heh--10% of loquax's contacts are one guy.

It's good to see you're still swollen with... pride? ...over the fact that, with your dozens of false accusations of sockpuppetry, one turned out to be correct. You should try again sometime -- it's a helluva lot more entertaining than watching you measure virtual "who's got more contacts" dicks.
posted by Krrrlson at 4:17 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

from the MSNBC link: ... Al-Kurdi said French and Arab doctors have “excluded the other reasons which caused Arafat’s platelet deficiency, like viral or bacterial infection, blood and other forms of cancer and lowered immunity.” ...
That would mean it wasn't AIDS, which is viral, is an infection, and lowers your immunity. Was that supposed to help make the case or completely demolish it?

And why is this compared to MeFi outing posts (called "crap") here in MeTa at all? Unless you meant to slur Arafat by calling him a diseased gay, i don't get it. And if those posts are "crap" in your eyes, why imitate them?
posted by amberglow at 4:28 PM on July 13, 2007

Or are you just meaning to slur us here?
posted by amberglow at 4:30 PM on July 13, 2007

Strike two!
posted by quin at 4:34 PM on July 13, 2007

CBS: What Killed Arafat? (about release of autopsy, runs thru a bunch of possibles with experts)
posted by amberglow at 4:36 PM on July 13, 2007

"I will wait patiently for when you apply your newfound standards to the next Rethuglican screed to hit the blue. Or not.

Pathetic."

Oh, Krrrrrrrrrrrlson, quit pretending that this wasn't shitty and that shitty leftist posts don't get deleted, OK? Disingenuousness doesn't look good on you.
posted by klangklangston at 4:38 PM on July 13, 2007

Plus, amberglow's right to remind you— shitty posts don't become less shitty when other people post shitty posts. That was that tu quoque thing I mentioned upthread. Jeez.
posted by klangklangston at 4:39 PM on July 13, 2007

NYT: Medical Records Say Arafat Died From a Stroke... The first independent review of the records, obtained by The New York Times, suggests that poisoning was highly unlikely and dispels a rumor that he may have died of AIDS. Nonetheless, the records show that despite extensive testing, his doctors could not determine the underlying infection. ...
posted by amberglow at 4:45 PM on July 13, 2007

(and HIV attacks white blood cells, so would he have had a high white count if it was AIDS?)
posted by amberglow at 4:49 PM on July 13, 2007

loquax & Krrrlson, if the alleged Reality-based Anti-Rethuglican bias of MetaFilter is so offensive to you, you might consider joining the far superior community at Late Night Shots.

I do like the idea that, once the poster of a deleted FrontPager posts a MeTa complaint about the deletion and it starts a discussion about the subject of the deleted post, that any attempt by the same person to do a "better" Front Page Post should be automatically deleted. We have seen good examples of other MeFites doing 'fixed' versions of bad posts, but NOT the same one.
posted by wendell at 4:51 PM on July 13, 2007

Despite what you like to tell yourself, the standard for shitty leftist posts to escape deletion is much lower. The followup post by loquax addressed the original complaints, and was deleted nevertheless. There is nothing "tu quoque" about complaining of a double standard.
posted by Krrrlson at 4:52 PM on July 13, 2007

When the MeTa post itself complaining about the deletion slurs many of us here, what was the standard being attempted anyway?
posted by amberglow at 4:55 PM on July 13, 2007

When all it takes for the Metafilter admins to shit their collective pants is your time-tested World's Most Offended Gay Man™ shtick, not much of a standard, you're right.
posted by Krrrlson at 5:02 PM on July 13, 2007

So, Krrrlson, what you'd really like is more thin leftist outrage newsfilter bullshit deleted? Me too. Is the answer to post this crap? Nope. Because I see a lot of "Well, there's a double standard" from you, and not a lot of "This is a good post and should stay."
posted by klangklangston at 5:10 PM on July 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

I'm afraid of gay people
posted by KokuRyu at 5:11 PM on July 13, 2007

Pluswise, you'd think that you'd note that the Amberglow contingent doesn't get their way nearly as many times as they complain. That's why they keep complaining.

It's almost as if no one feels that Metafilter is a perfect reflection of what should or should not be posted to the front page. I wonder why that might be?
posted by klangklangston at 5:12 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

When all it takes for the Metafilter admins to shit their collective pants is your time-tested World's Most Offended Gay Man™ shtick, not much of a standard, you're right.

What, so you're envious? jealous? delusional? feeling left out, you and loquax? wtf?

And your own time-tested shtick is lame and offensive, darling. It continues to be so.
posted by amberglow at 5:15 PM on July 13, 2007

BTW, my post-mortem opinion of Arafat is that he was way too much a "political survivor", i.e. an amoral egotist who set himself far above his cause or his constituency, and his dominance over the Palestinian people did them far more harm than good. And it would certainly not have surprised me if, during those times when he was 'holed up' in an armed fortress against attack from the Israelis (and often other Arabs), he may have indulged himself with his almost-exclusively-male Lieutenants. Which would have made him no more a 'fag' than the stereotypical PMITAPrison 'Bubba'. So my repulsion toward loquax's pathetic post is not out of a man-crush toward ol' Yassir.

An interesting discussion was possible about using AIDS and the Anti-Gay attitudes within Islam to discredit the late leader and his surviving followers, the strange political bedfellows (choice of words intentional) among those pushing the story, the reasons for such uncertainty over Arafat's cause of death (did it mean he had to be hiding something?), and other related issues. It just probably was NOT possible at MetaFilter.
posted by wendell at 5:20 PM on July 13, 2007

amberglow:

AFAIK (IANAD), AIDS hijacks T-whatever white cells, and makes your body produce them like crazy (so it has more of them to hijack).

From what I remember from the last time I heard of this at school (long time ago), slightly higher than normal white cell count means normal/bacterial infection (your body is upping the production to fight it), and insanely high white-cell count means something bad like leukemia or aids.

Now I'll bask in the glory of starting my post with 3 consecutive acronyms... I look so smart!
posted by qvantamon at 5:43 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

It's good to see you're still swollen with... pride?...

I did not bring up dhoyt here. I merely noted his outing was done by others. All I did was report it after the fact. And if you think my contacts dick is big, Mr. Baron-Von-Krrrlson's-Jew-Baiting-by-Proxy-Syndrome, sir, you should see my Currently-Dating-the-Holland-Tunnel favorites one. So, suck on that, crybaby.
posted by y2karl at 5:58 PM on July 13, 2007

Guess what? I'm gay!
posted by KokuRyu at 6:07 PM on July 13, 2007

Loquax, are you a sponge or a stone?
posted by KokuRyu at 6:19 PM on July 13, 2007

You know who else was . . . ?
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 6:27 PM on July 13, 2007

...gay? Your mom?
posted by loquacious at 7:32 PM on July 13, 2007

Anyone hear the Lez Zeppelin album that came out this past Tuesday?
posted by carsonb at 9:00 PM on July 13, 2007

Sorry everyone, had to go play softball. Glad to see there was fun to be had.

Fact: The PLFP founder and leader SAID Arafat had AIDS
Fact: AIDS=Gay (as I said, unfortunately) for many people in the world, first world or third world.
Fact: Islam as preached and practiced in the Arab world EXTREMELY intolerant of homosexuality. Far more so than Christianity in the US, or Republicans.
Fact: Hamas and Fatah are engaged in a civil war in all but name.

Was this a smear? Quite possibly if not probably. The original post and my follow-up (which did address everything that the admins said was problematic with the first post) did not mock Arafat or revel in his death, or the potential that he had AIDS or was gay. If you want to take that from it, fine, but you're just plain wrong. Perhaps nothing comes of the story, but it could be significant in the conflict in the West Bank. It certainly is no less significant than the daily updates on what the candidates said or what Guiliani did 20 years ago. This has nothing to do with left wing, or right wing or anything else. If anything, it is exposition of the dissemination of propaganda by Hamas and its agents in the next phase of the conflict in Palestine. I had heard the story before the original post, and thought it was potentially significant, that's why I was upset when it was deleted, especially when there was a good conversation and speculation about motives in the thread. And really, I've heard it all before about MEMRI. Calling a broadcast of someone in their own words, on tape "biased" because of the source is ludicrous. Believe me, if there was anyone else watching and translating the Arabic media, I would post from that site instead.

I don't comment much about politics here anymore because there's no point. Metafilter is a democratic/left wing/progressive/communist/Marxist site when it comes to politics and that's fine. I accept it and don't fight it much anymore. But I utterly fail to see why people have taken this as a political issue. For god's sake, it happened - the rumours are there, you can bet Hamas is calling Arafat all kinds of choice names up and down the West Bank and Gaza. Of course this is nothing new in general, but it's being done in a novel way, directly playing on bigotry and Islamic sympathies in smearing one of the giants of the 20th century (whatever your opinion of him). And if I really must say it (again) I will, I'm super-duper socially liberal. I'm Canadian, want drugs and prostitution legalized, go to the pride parade in Toronto every year with my friends, I hate any government intrusion in personal lives, am pro-choice, anti-gun and a total 100% atheist who's never set foot in a church, ever.

That, by the way, is why I find it so abhorrent that Arafats potential or rumoured AIDS or homosexuality would be used against him and Fatah by the PFLP or Hamas under the guise of religion and praying on the intolerance and ignorance of those it would influence. This cannot help Israel, or the US. It can only help Hamas, and therefore hurt the Palestinians (in my opinion).

I think the original post could have been fixed by the admins (by switching the links) instead of being deleted as has happened before. I think that my post addressed the stated issues with the first post and should have been left up, with derails being deleted. If that's too much trouble, fine, but don't tell me this post was any more of a "screed" than the outing republicans posts, or the myriad anti-bush/cheney posts, or 95% of the politics posts here.

I have always tried to be polite and constructive on this site, stating my views and arguing with others. Those that actually talked to me and engaged me, rather than calling me names will attest to this, I think. Only very rarely have I lost my temper or ad hominemed anyone, no matter the shit I got from all sides in some threads. And then look at this. So what am I? A pathetic, homophobic, neocon asshole who should get my own blog because I'm jealous of Arafat's lovers? And none of this gets deleted? No warnings from the admins to keep the conversation to the issue at hand? Or is this just "blowing off steam" in metatalk? Is it really totally cool to say stuff like this to members who are (as far as I know) playing 100% by the rules, making their points and doing so in good faith? Well, whatever, it's your site, and I'll speaking my mind until I get banned or something, I guess. Maybe I'm just deranged. No flame out yet, sorry. Maybe someday?
posted by loquax at 9:07 PM on July 13, 2007 [7 favorites]

I utterly fail to see why people have taken this as a political issue.

cuz only people trying to divert themselves from the policy disasters over the past 4+ years -- neocons/hard-core apparatchiks like powerline and the likudniks at MEMRI -- actually give a shit about this innuendo.

Here's some facts for you.

FACT: Arafat died a couple of years ago.
FACT: Arafat is still dead now.
FACT: Arafat was a broken man leading a broken Arab Nationalist institution at the time of his death.
FACT: Hypocritical sanctimonious "Family Values" twats in the Congress attempting to monkey with the Constitution to make it more in tune with their selective sheepherder morality is a lot more important to me, and I assume this community, than some innuendo-laden smear sourced from the right-wing noise machine.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 9:39 PM on July 13, 2007

I think the original post could have been fixed by the admins (by switching the links) instead of being deleted as has happened before.

On rare, rare occasions, and generally when there's a pretty strong consensus that it's the right thing to do, as far as I can recall. The vast majority of badly-wrought posts that get deleted stay deleted. That you really, really care about this one doesn't change that.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:03 PM on July 13, 2007

loquax -- Very well said, very well put.
posted by ericb at 10:09 PM on July 13, 2007

It's just strange to make two posts about Arafat having AIDS, then insinuate that he got AIDS because he was gay, and then make a big fuss when the level-headed folks of Metafilter

(come on, this site is hardly Leftist. Folks here tend to shoot down dogmatism in any form - it has nothing to do with politics, and everything to do with being intelligent, decent human beings, )which is why this community is so successful)

complain and mock you for it.

Outing politicians, Republican or otherwise is relevant mainly because these closeted politicians being exposed are usually homophobes, or oppose gay rights, and are hypocrites.

Arafat was gay? Big fucking deal. And you get no points for the homophobic tone of both posts as well.
posted by KokuRyu at 10:13 PM on July 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

Oh yeah? Well you're gay for Moleman!
posted by blue_beetle at 10:39 PM on July 13, 2007

Fact: AIDS=Gay (as I said, unfortunately) for many people in the world, first world or third world.

For many people? What does "many people" mean? I mean, by that standard "FACT: for many people republican = gay" Hell why not "FACT: for many people republican = gay pedophile" Do you have any evidence that a majority of AIDS cases in the third world "= GAY"?
posted by delmoi at 10:41 PM on July 13, 2007

Oh okay, you were saying that the "Fact" was that people associate AIDS with homosexuality, which may be true, not that AIDS and homosexuality are actually associated closely enough to call anyone who dies of AIDS a fag.
posted by delmoi at 10:43 PM on July 13, 2007

delmoi: Yes, that's what I meant, and always meant.
posted by loquax at 10:48 PM on July 13, 2007

What's most interesting about this "your team - my team" back-and-forth is that you'd think True Believers would want the hypocrites in their ranks to be exposed and marched off to wherever it is that they're sent. But that never happens. It's weird.
posted by maxwelton at 11:03 PM on July 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

And I'm not referring to Arafat, which seems like a yawner. As far as I know, he didn't condemn gays (whether he was or not).
posted by maxwelton at 11:05 PM on July 13, 2007

KokuRyu: (come on, this site is hardly Leftist. Folks here tend to shoot down dogmatism in any form - it has nothing to do with politics, and everything to do with being intelligent, decent human beings, )which is why this community is so successful)

I love this shit - 'we're not so much leftists as we are intelligent, beautiful snowflakes who commune at this here place for beautiful pragmatists....we shoot down dogmas like, like dogma-shooter-downers cuz that's what decent humans(like us) do. Coincidentally, the smartest people happen to be leftists, cuz everybody knows that dogmatic rightists are teh stoopidz.'

What a load of self-serving shit that is.
posted by rockhopper at 11:56 PM on July 13, 2007

Sometimes reading these MetaTalk posts is like watching retards fuck.

In this case, it's angry sex.
posted by fleacircus at 12:28 AM on July 14, 2007 [2 favorites]

Jessamyn, your comment comes off as cliquish

Sorry about that, I was more trying to see if it was just me who saw the new post as not much of an improvement over the old post. Then I saw the flag queue and realized that it wasn't just me who felt that way.

loquax, I don't think you're an asshole at all, but if you're going to include words like AIDS and "plague" in the same post, it better be pretty clear what you're talking about. Just trying to even the score because there have been some anti-Republican posts isn't at all an okay reason to post some lame rumorfilter stuff with extra flame-fanning for good measure. What did you think people would have to say about that? Why did you think it wouldn't just turn into another big fight?
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 1:20 AM on July 14, 2007

Because I see a lot of "Well, there's a double standard" from you, and not a lot of "This is a good post and should stay."

The second post was more than satisfactory and its almost immediate deletion showed exactly who pulls the strings around here. When an admin asks the echo chamber: "hey so this second post sux too, amirite?" -- as if there's any doubt as to what the agenda-pushers will say -- and then, huge surprise, the question becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy when the same agenda-pushers oblige by flagging the crap out of the post... well, there's little to say, really.
posted by Krrrlson at 1:52 AM on July 14, 2007

Sorry, Krrrlson+loquax, your agenda-pushing is even lamer than the batch of lame DU/Kos-filter posts that were deleted a while ago. If you were making wild posts about chemtrails and flamed out about it, at least it'd be funny. This is just sad.

Your bickering in here just makes you look look like freeper morons. Hopefully dios will show up here and school you (at least he's intelligent).
posted by blasdelf at 3:32 AM on July 14, 2007

loquax: I'm not an Arafat fanboy and he was a terrorist, and a rather nasty character allround, but his being smeared post-mortem by some of his biggest enemies (FPLP, Hizbollah and Mossad...I mean MEMRI) is newsworthy (never mind "Best of Web") exactly HOW? I mean, if I wrote that neighbours say that some dead relative of yours died of AIDS (whether with or without any factual support), wouldn't you expect the post to be deleted ipso-facto? And quite rightfully so!

And never mind that I'm pretty astounded to see the pro-Israel crow suddenly give any credit to Al-Manar. Live and see...

I wonder if your posts and subsequent hissy fit is in any way connected the fact that fellow Canadian neocon Conrad Black was found guilty of fraud.. (You see, loquax, that's a fact, not a smear).
posted by Skeptic at 3:46 AM on July 14, 2007

Pro-Israel crowd, not crow.
posted by Skeptic at 3:48 AM on July 14, 2007

loquax, what you talk about in your post is not what was the posts on Metafilter, which is a shame, because what you're talking (saying Arafat was gay as propaganda trick) sounds interesting, but the way the original and second FPP were done, it just comes off as a screed.

The original post and my follow-up (which did address everything that the admins said was problematic with the first post) did not mock Arafat or revel in his death, or the potential that he had AIDS or was gay.

Oh, come on. The powerline link called him a vile human being. The admins said come up with better sources. You kept the same source, but included more links to it, because you think it's VERY VERY IMPORTANT.

Frankly the sheer laziness of that second post is embarrassing. You shoulda been able nail that topic cold, but you didn't. You mentioned interesting points here on Metatalk, but never included them! You just seemed in love that Memri link, get a room already.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:56 AM on July 14, 2007

The original post and my follow-up (which did address everything that the admins said was problematic with the first post) did not mock Arafat or revel in his death, or the potential that he had AIDS or was gay.

No? Not even the title of the first FPP? "militantly gay"?

Stop digging, loquax.
posted by Skeptic at 4:53 AM on July 14, 2007

Nah, keep digging. This is fun. In a little while you'll have finished a tunnel to either smuggle weapons for Palestinians or illegal Mexicans through, and then you'll have another great post for us.
posted by nevercalm at 5:34 AM on July 14, 2007

Jessamyn, I was quoting someone who equated AIDS with a plague. There have been many posts using inflammatory rhetoric as a hook, and I certainly hope that I've made it clear by now why I find it significant (as does the mainstream media, judging by the number of articles that referenced the AIDS rumour at the time of his death and the speculation around his autopsy). The post had primary source material showing them say it in their own words. And he was saying it about one of the most important newsmakers of the last 50 years, who's followers are now in a civil war. No, I don't believe it's the most important story in the world, no I don't believe that the average member here cares about this more than what their congressman is doing, but I didn't realize that those were criteria for posting. What happened to ignore the post if you don't like it?

I wasn't trying to even any scores. I don't think that's possible. But I couldn't help but notice the parallels between the original post and the other outing posts with garbage sources that were just fine with the community. If anything, I imagined the discussion going something like "who cares if he was gay or had AIDS, but given the manipulation of this rumour by Islamic fundamentalists in palestine, this could have serious consequences". And by the way, if we're saying that it's cool to out republicans because they're hypocrites, well, it doesn't get much more hypocritical that being a leader who drapes themselves in Islam and then has sex with men.

I really don't care about these people are saying and I'm not going to bother addressing critisisms that choose not to take what I've written over and over at face value and instead take glee in piling on. I think either they're nuts, being disingenuous or simply don't understand my point here. But what I would like to know is, how did (at least the second post) break the guidelines? Clearly I'm not saying it was an excellent post, and yes, I think it could have been better done, but my impression was (at least from Cortex and from Matt) that the "concept" of the post was OK, just that the original was poorly done and directly linked to the wrong sites. I tried to fix that by putting together at least a palatable post where the decent discussion happening in the first post could continue. At least some people agreed with me. Unless you truly believe I was being a troll (and given my posting history here, I'd have to say you were wrong, despite the chattering masses), I don't see the problem with it. Certainly there are posts up right now on the front page that come closer, with editorializing, wikipedia links, and a very thin premise. If my post didn't break the guidelines, then it was pulled either due to an editorial decision on your part, or a decision influenced by the people who are ranting and raving and flagging their little heads off here. Is that what Cortex means when he refers to "consensus"? I didn't think posts got pulled based on the admin's opinion of the content or the number of flags. And that's what really rubbed me the wrong way about this.
posted by loquax at 6:41 AM on July 14, 2007

Calling loquax a neocon is just laughable, given his posting history and stated political views. I too consider myself on the left side of the political spectrum, but it drives me batty to hear my fellow leftists smear anyone who disagrees with the "prevailing wisdom" as in fact a neocon in disguise. It's this sort of black/white, good/evil nonsense that plagues American politics and in fact is precisely the techniques that the neocons used to convince half of your electorate to vote for them!! Perhaps loquax and I do not feel as drawn into completely identifying with one of only 2 political perspectives -- maybe its a reflection of the canadian political system.

In any event, while the first post was definitely garbage, I also don't think the 2nd (though better done) post was "best of the web. However, I think a lot of what sticks on the blue is not "best of web", but rather "here's some interesting news and a bit of background". This is ultimately is the crux of the problem, and is what allows for accusations of political bias.

The freq that this occurs (and similar debates) may indicate the admins should think about adding news.metafilter.com, or something similar. It certainly seems like there is a segment of the mefi community that wants to talk about those kind of things. This would leave the blue strictly for "best of the web", not newsfilter, obitfilter, politicalscandalfilter, etc.
posted by modernnomad at 7:08 AM on July 14, 2007

Fact: AIDS=Gay (as I said, unfortunately) for many people in the world, first world or third world.

More gay cancer plague propaganda from right-wing moonbats. When will this stupidity ever stop?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 7:21 AM on July 14, 2007

klangklangston writes 'Man, right now I'm having trouble thinking of a single lesbian musician who's better than 50/50 on making decent music.

Dusty Springfield for teh win.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 8:32 AM on July 14, 2007 [1 favorite]

BP, how is that "gay cancer propaganda?" He was saying it's an unfortunate and incorrect perception!
posted by Snyder at 9:38 AM on July 14, 2007

Wow.

Has anyone flamed out yet? This one seems like it could be shaping up to be a good show.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:04 AM on July 14, 2007

If my post didn't break the guidelines, then it was pulled either due to an editorial decision on your part, or a decision influenced by the people who are ranting and raving and flagging their little heads off here. Is that what Cortex means when he refers to "consensus"? I didn't think posts got pulled based on the admin's opinion of the content or the number of flags. And that's what really rubbed me the wrong way about this.

Evey post gets pulled due to editorial decisions which is what cortex and I have been saying here. If you don't like that people on the site hated your post you can try to make a better one, or go to a site that think that sort of post *is* a good post. There's no such thing as an objectively good post to the internet. Post live within the framework of the site they appear on and the timeframe they appear. There was an active MeTa post talking about why the first post was bad when you posted yours which really wasn't much better.

That said, with flagging, there are judgement calls "gee, this post only got a few flags but I think it breaks the guidelines..." and there are landslides. Yours was a landslide. I haven't seen a post that wasn't a self-link get that many flags in months. I'm sorry it was a bad fit for the site, but on its own it seemed like a score-settling screed of a post. You've done a much better job of describing why the issue might be intereting here than your post did.

And seriously, the plague stuff? Use quotes if you're quoting and don't feel that you need to pull the most "OMG OUTRAGE" parts of a link to be on the front page. It makes whatever discussion your post might have off to a bad start.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:12 AM on July 14, 2007

Jessamyn: My understanding of the guidelines as published is that posts get pulled when they're self-links, single-link op-eds, links to *clearly* objectionable material (hate sites, whatever), or they're just plain garbage. I didn't think that there was editorial oversight as to the subject matter, or that just the sheer volume of flags (for what? offensive content? to whom?) can influence your decisions. Matt said himself that the political content or nature of the post would stand, but for the links (unless I misunderstood). I tried to rectify that (at the urging of several posters) and it was pulled again.

I had quotes in the posts itself, but not in the title, which was an oversight on my part (and easily correctable), but I cannot believe that people were flagging the post because they believed that *I* was telling the members of Fatah to be happy they got rid of the "plague". If they did, they clearly didn't read the post. And to be honest, I don't understand why you're now telling me this post wasn't a good "fit" for the site when upthread you called my request for an understanding of what constitutes a fit "bizarre".

yours which really wasn't much better.

I really have to disagree with this. I think my post was firmly within the guidelines of the site and was pulled because of the mob and because you and cortex personally didn't like the subject matter or the source. I can't comment on whether or not that's fair, but a simple email to me (maybe when everyone upthread was challenging me to make a better post out of the first one) telling me to just drop this because of the hassle from the flags would have made me shut up, rather than, respectfully, what I think are after the fact rationalizations on your part. Why is an avalanche of flags from the people who are being jackasses in the threads, willfully misinterpreting what I'm saying and calling me names cause for deletion, rather than leaving the post up and ignoring the flags? Why does the post need to be deleted instead of their derails and noise? Why didn't I have a chance to stand up for the post in the comments and make the points that you seem to acknowledge are valid there instead of in this thread? There's no need to respond again, and I won't write anymore here, I didn't intend for this mess to happen and I didn't mean to call you out, even though I guess I have, I just really don't understand the reasons you're giving me.
posted by loquax at 12:37 PM on July 14, 2007

Why didn't I have a chance to stand up for the post in the comments and make the points that you seem to acknowledge are valid there instead of in this thread?

Because you made a shitty repost of a shitty post.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:04 PM on July 14, 2007

Loquax is the most persecuted person ever! Why can't we all just see that.
posted by chunking express at 1:14 PM on July 14, 2007

willfully misinterpreting ...

There speaks the weasel wording voice of experience.
posted by y2karl at 1:19 PM on July 14, 2007

Skeptic: "And never mind that I'm pretty astounded to see the pro-Israel crow suddenly give any credit to Al-Manar. Live and see..."

I have to agree. The pro-Isreal crow's message has been getting a little convoluted in the last few years. He was once a hero to kids everywhere. Now-a-days... I just don't know.
posted by team lowkey at 1:20 PM on July 14, 2007 [1 favorite]

Loquax is the most persecuted person ever! Why can't we all just see that.


Way to argue on the merits.
posted by Kwantsar at 1:51 PM on July 14, 2007

Metafilter is a democratic/left wing/progressive/communist/Marxist site when it comes to politics and that's fine.

/Seinfeld: Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Loquax has said some intelligent things, but also some pretty stupid ones. The wheels have come off of his political agenda over the past five years, and now we get to see him grasping at the most desperate of straws. I'll admit, I kind of find it amusing, but it's getting to be very sad as well.

The fact that he can't, in a spirit of intellectual honesty, admit his FPP was crap and has to blame the rest of the site for his inability to post something both FPP- and neocon-worthy is a testament to this fact.
posted by bardic at 1:55 PM on July 14, 2007 [1 favorite]

I think I can get behind this pro-Israel crow. Al-Manar be damned.

Thank you team lowkey, I lol'd heartily.
posted by kosem at 3:05 PM on July 14, 2007

Is that what Cortex means when he refers to "consensus"?

No. What I meant when I referred to "consensus" was my belief that the edit-and-resurrect dance you brought up as a possibility for the original post has happened only in situations where pretty much the whole chorus of the resulting metatalk thread was really, really for it. This clearly wasn't one of those rare cases, so the idea that we're somehow failing to treat the post equitably by not entertaining that suggestion is pretty weird and self-involved.
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:12 PM on July 14, 2007

What bardic said. Look, loquax, you reposted a bit of sleazy gossip with different but equally crappy links. People didn't flag it for the paranoid reasons you're suggesting; they flagged it because it was a crappy post. Seriously, get over it and get some perspective.
posted by languagehat at 3:17 PM on July 14, 2007

I wonder if your posts and subsequent hissy fit is in any way connected the fact that fellow Canadian neocon Conrad Black was found guilty of fraud.. (You see, loquax, that's a fact, not a smear).

Wow... ever listen to yourself?

More gay cancer plague propaganda from right-wing moonbats. When will this stupidity ever stop?

There's no place like home... there's no place like home... *assumes fetal position*

Loquax has said some intelligent things, but also some pretty stupid ones.

Yeah, remember how he flamed the fuck out because he was sick of hearing about the victims of a major catastrophe and was banned for a week? Talk about wheels coming off... oh, wait.
posted by Krrrlson at 3:22 PM on July 14, 2007 [1 favorite]

Well, to put it bluntly as possible Krrrlson -- I was right, mathowie was wrong. God forbid I should be passionate about what I considered to be a very poor moderation decision.

But yeah, I guess I'd be more of a hero in your eyes if I did more FPPs involving Freep and LGF.
posted by bardic at 3:42 PM on July 14, 2007

You know the wingers in the US are losing steam when their biggest defenders are Canadians.
A pleasure to watch, really.
posted by mr.marx at 3:45 PM on July 14, 2007 [1 favorite]

(And btw, Republican/conservative/winger/neocon mefites should do us all a fucking favor and grow the hell up. It's not this site that's persecuting you, it's the fucking world of reality. You were wrong about everything -- every goddamn thing -- over the past five years, and now you come whining to meta as if it isn't your ridiculous faith in a moron named Bush and a thug named Cheney that caused you to dig the intellectual and moral holes you find yourselves in? I love it when you guys say, so calmly, "I stay out of political threads now" as if you're St. Mother Theresas of the blue. I'd stay the hell out of them too, since I have a pretty solid sense of shame.

Honestly, we're supposed to make you feel welcome here, or anywhere? Unbelievable. You guys were happy to dish it out three or four years ago. Now we're supposed to take sensitivity classes regarding what sources of fact loquax considers appropriate? Get bent.)
posted by bardic at 3:51 PM on July 14, 2007 [3 favorites]

It's not this site that's persecuting you, it's the fucking world of reality.

Well, you do know that reality has a known liberal bias.
posted by quin at 4:09 PM on July 14, 2007

Way to argue on the merits.
posted by Kwantsar

Metatalk threads such as this one have little to do with merit. It's a stand up show with one liners thrown left and right. Pick a side and enjoy the ride. Blazecock Pileon has the right idea. Favorite every single comment that supports your view and puts down the opposition no matter how brain numbingly dumb.

Loquax has said some intelligent things, but also some pretty stupid ones.
posted by bardic

What an amazing lack of self perception. Honestly, very few on metafilter come off as unhinged has you bardic. You're a caricature of a hundred other metafilter members, only without the iq to match. Your whole black/white , us against them attitude is childish and ignorant, and thank god for threads like this where you're bated and can't resist showing what a wackjob you truly are.
posted by justgary at 4:12 PM on July 14, 2007

Honestly, we're supposed to make you feel welcome here, or anywhere? Unbelievable.

If loquax's post was anti-Semitic, it would have been removed faster and no one would have stood up to defend it — or him. It's telling and welcoming to see the usual nutballs stand up for this hateful, gaytastic shit.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:28 PM on July 14, 2007 [1 favorite]

Ah yes, the "crazy unhinged librul" smear. Yeah, that one worked in 2003. But guess what? Most Americans are actually pretty much in line with my world-view -- we don't like Republican ideas, we don't like this president, and we don't like this war.

But for justgary and loquax and krrrlson, not being a part of the reality-based community doesn't phase them at all. They simply beg and whine and bitch, over and over, about how the mods should move the goal-posts so they can feel comfortable here. Because really, if there's one thing wing-nuts value and cherish, it's feelings. And there's are a hurtin', oh my goodness.

Like I said, grow the fuck up.
posted by bardic at 4:32 PM on July 14, 2007 [3 favorites]

It's telling and welcoming to see the usual nutballs stand up for this hateful, gaytastic shit.

What does it tell, Asstastic One Note?
posted by rockhopper at 4:32 PM on July 14, 2007

bardic, what are you, 18? 20? To you, full-grown means in line with your thinking. You have no idea how well you are playing to type. Reality-based community: we set the rules, you follow them, and don't you dare have your own thoughts.
posted by rockhopper at 4:38 PM on July 14, 2007

What does it tell, Asstastic One Note?

It tells him nothing, just that he sees what he wants to see, that anyone who disagrees with him is his dire enemy, who must be stopped at all costs. God forbid someone disagree with the great Blazecock! It saves him the trouble of actually reading, because he's too scared to actually see nuance.
posted by Snyder at 4:47 PM on July 14, 2007

You're more than welcome to have your own thoughts and comments. Nobody has called for bans. Nobody has said loquax should never be allowed to post again. What the mods said through their actions was "The initial FPP sucked," and loquax's attempt at a "protest" FPP also sucked.

This is not censorship. This is quality control.
posted by bardic at 4:48 PM on July 14, 2007

too scared to actually see nuance

His post isn't about nuance. It's a shitty, hateful post with the main purpose of childish axe-grinding. Grow up.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:40 PM on July 14, 2007

Most Americans are actually pretty much in line with my world-view...

Judging by the fact that I don't see any crowds ranting and frothing in the streets, I wouldn't be so sure.

Republican/conservative/winger/neocon mefites should do us all a fucking favor...

I always find it precious that so many rabid, self-righteous keyboard warriors can obsess about the -- how many is it? three? four? -- people around here that don't toe the party line.
posted by Krrrlson at 6:36 PM on July 14, 2007

Also, just to set the record straight, AIDS is not at all a problem in the gay community, yes?
posted by Krrrlson at 6:38 PM on July 14, 2007

the party line

I only toe the line 'cause it's a conga line.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:57 PM on July 14, 2007

Krrrlson, being anti-war, anti-Bush, or anti-Republican is no longer a fringe position, nor is it solely the territory of loquax's strawman of the supposed "democratic/left wing/progressive/communist/Marxist" mefi nexus.

Frankly, I'm all for people who are brave enough to hold unpopular views -- it can be a mark of character. But what this whole thread is about, IMO, isn't loquax wanting to be heard despite offering an alternative and/or unpopular viewpoint, it's about him, and you, and a few others, wanting special equivalency measures put in place so that we can move the goal-posts to suit your ideological needs.

Boo-freakin'-hoo.
posted by bardic at 7:01 PM on July 14, 2007

Bardic, I still think you're missing loquax's point. Here are loquax's views -- they're basically the same as mine, and I'd wager, the same as yours:

[I] want drugs and prostitution legalized, go to the pride parade in Toronto every year with my friends, I hate any government intrusion in personal lives, am pro-choice, anti-gun and a total 100% atheist who's never set foot in a church, ever.

He/she's not a frothing-at-the-mouth rightwing ideologue, regardless of how you try to paint him/her.. what she/he has done (and this isn't what krrrlson et al have done, which is why I'm not defending them) is take a position that says despite his own political beliefs, he has enough conviction in them to not require other views to be shut out of the discourse. He tried to prove a bigger point about MeFi by re-doing a shitty post. Was the end result "best of the web"? Of course not. But I think this discussion is still a valuable one to have, for it reveals a lot about us.

To me, this is no bad thing. I think it takes a certain amount of principle to take an obviously biased and shitty post and try and reformat it to make a larger point about how a community is run.

At my core, I am unwilling to see my fellow travellers on the left go down the same shitty road that the neocons have taken and would gladly have us follow, which is vitriol and hatred to anyone that doesn't share our line of thinking.

Bardic, you're playing into the right's hands. We're better than that. We shouldn't resort to, and moreover, don't NEED to resort to the tactics of Coulter and her ilk.
posted by modernnomad at 7:46 PM on July 14, 2007

...being anti-war, anti-Bush, or anti-Republican is no longer a fringe position...

Disregarding for the moment the fact that it was hardly a fringe position in the first place (and certainly not here), this has little to do with your position and everything to do with your delusion that everyone is just as immature, loud, and angry as yourself.

...so that we can move the goal-posts to suit your ideological needs.

I understand your desire to keep the goalposts biased in your favour. I'd flame out, like you did when you wanted the goalposts biased even further for *your* ideology, but it seems that doesn't always work too well.
posted by Krrrlson at 7:59 PM on July 14, 2007

Bardic, you're playing into the right's hands.

Because playing nice with them has taken us so far these past seven years.

Comparing me to Ann Coulter? I didn't suggest someone put rat poison in his tea.
posted by bardic at 8:17 PM on July 14, 2007

He tried to prove a bigger point about MeFi by re-doing a shitty post.

I would say that I did not try to prove any points, even though it may look that way. I've done so in the past, but am long over trying to prove anything here (though I do agree with your general assessment of things). I couldn't care less anymore what the bent is here and I really don't care whether or not a bunch of anonymous usernames agree with me or like me or not (which is why I haven't bothered responding to most of the crap in this thread, but some people keep attacking me as if waiting for me to snap and say what I *REALLLLYY* think about gays and aids, to my great amusement). I just thought the deletion was unfair as per the guidelines of the site, and the reasons given unsatisfactory, that's all. And obviously, I think the content behind either post, despite whatever complaints about presentation, was strong enough to be posted, as many have agreed. I don't post enough here anymore to have a vested interest in trying to change things.

Also, I had no intention of re-posting the original until I was challenged by several people to do so in a better way or stop whining in this thread. Which I think was fair, by the way.
posted by loquax at 8:25 PM on July 14, 2007

It was worth a shot, modernnomad - you can change and/or persuade a lot of minds with your mature, speak-and-let-speak attitude, but bardic's immaturity goes to the bone.
posted by rockhopper at 8:27 PM on July 14, 2007

Or forcibly converting him to Islam. Again, I'm sick of the false equivalencies.

But look, since it's clear the the mefi community has been far too harsh on poor lil' loquax and krrrlson, I apologize for using rhetoric that was hotter than it needed to be.
posted by bardic at 8:32 PM on July 14, 2007

I couldn't care less anymore what the bent is here

Although, that didn't stop you grinding your axe here or in the blue.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 8:59 PM on July 14, 2007

Never thought I'd be the one to say this, but this MeTa's gone well past discussing the actual post, and have now entered the eye-poking/hair-pulling portion of the show. Why don't we call it a night, gang?
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:27 PM on July 14, 2007

It's like the Special Olympics all up in here.
posted by The Deej at 9:55 PM on July 14, 2007 [1 favorite]

Although, that didn't stop you grinding your axe here or in the blue.

In a bizarre genetic twist that baffled scientists, Alex was born without a single irony receptacle.
posted by Krrrlson at 10:03 PM on July 14, 2007

Hi, Krrrlson, what's your name? Or are you just another anonymous asshole, like that other creep?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:52 PM on July 14, 2007

Mods! Time to kill the thread! Nothing more can be accomplished here.

*cries* for the loss of the IMG tag.


Free-Form Lasagna with Wild Mushrooms and Parmesan Cream

Categories: Main dish, Pasta
Yields: 1 servings

3 ounces Fresh mushrooms; varied
1 Sprig; fresh rosemary
2 Sheets lasagna; uncooked
1 tablespoon butter
1 tablespoon olive oil
Salt to taste
Ground black pepper to taste
1/4 cup heavy cream
3 tablespoons Freshly grated Parmesan

Bring a large pot of water to boil.

Remove and discard mushroom stems. Wash caps and cut into 1/4 inch
thick slices. Finely chop rosemary leaves to get 1/2 tsp.

Cook pasta to taste. Remove to colander or towel, ensuring pieces
don't stick together.

In a large skillet over medium-high heat, heat butter and oil until
butter melts and foam subsides. Add mushrooms in one layer, and cook
without stirring until brown on one side. Add salt and freshly ground
pepper to taste, and rosemary. Continue to cook, stirring, until
mushrooms are tender. Remove to plate.

Return skillet to medium heat. Add cream and 2 tbs. cheese, stirring
until cheese melts. (Sauce will be slightly grainy.) Remove from heat
and season with salt and pepper.

Dip lasagna sheet into sauce, lay on plate, folded once. Scatter
mushroom mixture on top. Dip remaining lasagna sheet in sauce, place
on top of mushrooms, folding over once. Pour remaining sauce on top,
and scatter remaining tbs. of Parmesan on top of all. Serve
immediately.

Per serving: 564 calories, 10 g. protein, 14 g. carbohydrates, 3 g.
sugar, 53 g. fat, 128 mg. cholesterol, 397 mg. sodium, 1 mg. fiber.

-----

posted by Slithy_Tove at 11:05 PM on July 14, 2007

Hi, Krrrlson, what's your name? Or are you just another anonymous asshole, like that other creep?

At least I only have one alias.
posted by Krrrlson at 11:10 PM on July 14, 2007

That's what I thought, weasel.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:13 PM on July 14, 2007

Examples of verbal taunts

* "Liar, liar, YO MAMA!"
* "Your Face!"
* "Your Mum is gay!" (has evolved into "Yo' Momma")
* "Up Yours!"
* "Bite Me Blondie"
* "Pizza Face!"
* "Get a life fat ass!"
* "You suck my mom"
* "You suck at life!"/"You suck dicks!"
* "Dumb ass in the pants"
* "Your Mother was a Hamster, and your Father smelt of Elderberries!" (By Monty Python)
* "Fuck off!/Fuck you!"
* "Man boobs!"
* "Josh C. lick man bewbs!" (By Monty Python)
* "Girls go to college to get more knowledge, Boys go to Jupiter to get more stupider!"
* "What's the matter? Finished already?"
* "I've hardly broken up a sweat here."

posted by Meatbomb at 2:59 AM on July 15, 2007

His post isn't about nuance. It's a shitty, hateful post with the main purpose of childish axe-grinding. Grow up.

I'm not talking about his post, dumbass, just your need to smear anyone who might disagree with you about whatever hair is up your ass today as a homophobic neocon.
posted by Snyder at 5:01 AM on July 15, 2007

Mmmmmmmmmmm Lasagna!!!!!!! Both I and my fat kitty thank you for that recipe.

I vote that recipes should be the new threadbombing method. Images were funny, sure, but recipes... them's delicious!!!!!!!
posted by The Deej at 6:11 AM on July 15, 2007

...anonymous asshole...weasel.

Now that's the Alex I know and love.
posted by Krrrlson at 7:14 AM on July 15, 2007

Do keep ignoring my question, though.
posted by Krrrlson at 7:17 AM on July 15, 2007

Do keep ignoring my question, though.

You know that your question is deliberately misleading, because AIDS was portrayed here again, by right-wing nutjobs such as yourself and those organizations who represent your fucked-up bigoted views, as entirely a "gay" disease:

I say to every honorable member of the Fatah movement that he should be happy that we got rid of the plague

Might as well have put in a link to Aryan Nations' website in an "even-handed, fair" post about black or Jewish people. And such a bullshit post would have been deleted even faster than this bullshit post.

So there's your answer, Anonymous Weasel.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 8:49 AM on July 15, 2007

metafilter: a caricature of a hundred others, only without the iq to match.
posted by quonsar at 8:50 AM on July 15, 2007

"This is not censorship. This is quality control." - Adolf Eichmann
posted by quonsar at 8:55 AM on July 15, 2007

"This ain't rock and roll. This is genocide." - David Bowie
posted by The Deej at 9:48 AM on July 15, 2007

"This ain't no party. This ain't no disco. This ain't no foolin' around." - Talking Heads
posted by hangashore at 9:57 AM on July 15, 2007

"I think sex is better than logic, but I can't prove it." - (Anonymous)
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:57 AM on July 15, 2007

"Don't make it hard for people to like you" - Dad
*Runs off sobbing*
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:35 AM on July 15, 2007

Ceiling cat is finding your inane prattle extremely boring.
posted by y2karl at 11:30 AM on July 15, 2007

Huh, I guess that aiming for the shittiest post you might get away with doesn't always go so well.
posted by NortonDC at 11:35 AM on July 15, 2007 [2 favorites]

Jesus fuck you people are still talking about this?
posted by dersins at 12:05 PM on July 15, 2007

Why won't you talk to me
---I feel like I'm drowning
You never talk to me
---You know I can't breathe now
What are you thinking
---We're going nowhere
What are you feeling
---We're going nowhere

- Pink Floyd
posted by The Deej at 1:29 PM on July 15, 2007

There is a channel called "Private Spice" on Bulgarian cable TV that broadcasts hardcore pornography in the wee hours. Right now I am watching people fucking on TV. A woman is getting it doggie style on a couch and fellating a second man, while a second woman services herself with a large dildo and looks on.
posted by Meatbomb at 4:11 PM on July 15, 2007 [1 favorite]

Can you quantify "large"?
posted by cortex (staff) at 4:13 PM on July 15, 2007

Well, cortex, you wouldn't have to ask for a qualifier if we HAD THE FUCKING IMAGE TAG BACK!!!!

I mean really. Without the image tag, we are having to actually be creative and think before we threatbomb. Recipes, lyrics, descriptions of porn. I mean come on. That's too much work!

Although that lasagna looks deeelish!
posted by The Deej at 4:19 PM on July 15, 2007

Large.
posted by quin at 4:43 PM on July 15, 2007

...anonymous asshole...weasel...right-wing nutjobs such as yourself...your fucked-up bigoted views...

Want a hankie for all that spittle?

You know that your question is deliberately misleading...

So *my* very straightforward and unambiguous question is "deliberately misleading" because *you* claim that *someone else* misrepresented AIDS as an entirely gay disease (which is a lie, of course, since no one in this thread did anything of the sort)? You ever get tired of trying to climb out of all the holes you've dug for yourself?
posted by Krrrlson at 8:54 PM on July 15, 2007

Want a hankie for all that spittle?

Are you done with yours, troll?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 9:16 PM on July 15, 2007

You guys need to take this to email, it's not doing anything useful to keep this back and forth going.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:40 PM on July 15, 2007

But we like to watch, Jessamyn!
posted by Meatbomb at 10:11 PM on July 15, 2007

Eh, it's all in reruns, Meatbomb.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:34 PM on July 15, 2007

Way to argue on the merits.

The post sucked: QED.

This MetaTalk thread also sucks, but in a good way.
posted by chunking express at 9:18 AM on July 16, 2007

If I hated reruns, I wouldn't watch Law and Order every day.

I guess I'm just amazed that folks are still arguing that this was a decent post. It was weak rumor-filter, and didn't deserve to be on the site. At best, it would have be a speculative newsfilter post that may or may not have had some relevancy to the greater Palestinean conflict, but even then it would be fucking thin. It's an A-9 story, and shouldn't be on the front page. It's old, it's poorly sourced and it's something that's only going to invite a vicious bunch of assholery in the comments from the same handful of jerkasses that would post in any equivalent thread.

And I say that as someone who generally thinks that loquax has decent stuff to say. I enjoy posts by Kwantsar, even when I disagree with the framing (I can't say that with regard to Krrrlson or justgary, because I frankly don't remember any of their posts and don't feel like looking them up).

Further, the thought that MeFi is some socialist paradise is fucking bullshit, and shows a pretty selective memory. Again and again, economically leftist posts get tirades from the free marketeers, and this place skews both socially and fiscally libertarian. That there are a couple of vocal moderate leftists (don't confuse Amberglow's volume with his longitude) and slightly fewer vocal moderate rightists (there are very few folks here who I'd consider true rightists) doesn't bear on this post being crap.

And finally, reasonable people may disagree on the quality of that post, but it got axed because it was too close to the line and there was little community support for it. Despite their appointment, the three mods here are downright senatorial in balancing representation and leadership. That this MeTa has become a grudge match has only a grain of relationship to the FPP— mostly, it's been people with bad blood using it as an excuse to call each other pig fuckers.
posted by klangklangston at 9:52 AM on July 16, 2007

Dude! Don't say "pig fucker" in front of Jesus!
posted by dersins at 10:22 AM on July 16, 2007

Are you done with yours, troll?

Well, it'd be nice to get a few more epithets from the master of flameouts, but I think I've seen enough of your squirming for a while.

You guys need to take this to email, it's not doing anything useful to keep this back and forth going.

Wait, so deleting the thread doesn't work for everything?
posted by Krrrlson at 3:43 PM on July 16, 2007

{{{{{{{{{Group hug!}}}}}}}}}}}}
posted by The Deej at 5:07 PM on July 16, 2007

Hugs for everyone!

Yay!
posted by saguaro at 5:42 PM on July 16, 2007

I think I've seen enough of your squirming for a while.

You flatter yourself, troll. Back under your rock with you.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 6:32 PM on July 16, 2007

Please. It's hard to hug if you keep squirming.
posted by The Deej at 8:48 PM on July 16, 2007 [1 favorite]

Careful with those group hugs. In Krrrlson's magical fantasy land, if you hug gay people you'll get teh AIDS.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 8:53 PM on July 16, 2007

We can't hear you over the hugging, man.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:22 PM on July 16, 2007

Not really, but I have a distinct feeling that if I were to hug you, I'd get rabies.
posted by Krrrlson at 10:54 PM on July 16, 2007

IMO "Ain't Nobodies Business If You Do" should be required reading. Get the library version; the web one just doesn't read as nicely.
posted by five fresh fish at 11:11 PM on July 16, 2007

Not really, but I have a distinct feeling that if I were to hug you, I'd get rabies.

Careful, you get too close you might catch my cold, you following me around the site as much as you do.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:01 AM on July 17, 2007

Just hugs, hugs, hugs, every little place the eyes might fall.
posted by cortex (staff) at 6:44 AM on July 17, 2007