How can we get staff to stick to promises?

March 27, 2025 8:05 AM

The site update should happen by Wednesday of next week at the very latest. If it doesn't, mods will make a post a MeTa explaining the delay.] posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:44 PM on March 20 [+] [⚑]

Once again, a self-set deadline has come and gone, with no communication from staff. How can the board encourage the staff to a) fulfill promises they have made, and b) not make promises that they don't intend to keep?

To be clear, I don't really care about the site update, I'm much more concerned about the pattern of staff committing to something and then letting that commitment pass by without comment. This seems like a process issue.

posted by bowbeacon to Etiquette/Policy at 8:05 AM (130 comments total)

accountability partners for the accountability partners.
posted by sagc at 8:17 AM on March 27 [9 favorites]

Mod note: Yep, I dropped the ball there (original comment), so my apologies.

I usually set a reminder or have note for that stuff, just forgot to do it this time around.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:19 AM on March 27

Mod note: The site update should be out by Friday evening, have been waiting on some information.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:20 AM on March 27

Like I said, I'm not really concerned about the update, I'm concerned that this CONSTANTLY happens. It's not your fault, it's the fault of whatever systems have been provided to the mods to manage their workloads.

I think we should work towards solving that.
posted by bowbeacon at 8:21 AM on March 27 [8 favorites]

Step 1: grab a pack of post it notes
Step 2: write "bruh." on the top post it
Step 3: peel that post it off and stick it on your monitor
hth
posted by phunniemee at 9:00 AM on March 27 [11 favorites]

Honestly, that doesn't help. There are mods in 4? 5? cities around the world. There should be some sort of task tracking software that they can all see and use. Putting tasks on one person's monitor is how you get into this sort of mess. The goal shouldn't be to remind a single mod to do something, it should be to remind the mods. Keep the bus number high.
posted by bowbeacon at 9:03 AM on March 27 [3 favorites]

I think we should work towards solving that.

Heard, and yes, we are working on that.

Also, please note that part of the transition now involves working with volunteers who don't work around the clock and, whose precious time and availability might be limited.
posted by loup (staff) at 9:08 AM on March 27

What steps are you taking towards that?
posted by bowbeacon at 9:09 AM on March 27 [4 favorites]

that's a reason things might be delayed, loup, but it's in no way an excuse for the constant failure to estimate timelines with any sort of realism, to repeatedly promise changes to behavior that never materialize, or for repeatedly failing to execute things as simple as "tell the users of a changed timeline".
posted by sagc at 9:17 AM on March 27 [8 favorites]

Dropped the ball
Dropped the ball
Dropped the ball
Dropped the ball
Dropped the ball
posted by Diskeater at 9:51 AM on March 27 [10 favorites]

Mod note: What steps are you taking towards that?
– We've moved from this being a one person effort to a team effort and set timelines/owners for each section of the site update.
– I'm working with the board to set better communication channels for volunteers, the board and the staff.
– Brandon and I discussed just yesterday the possibility of breaking the site update into different posts (tech updates, admin updates, moderation updates, etc..) that way once section won't hold the other.

posted by loup (staff) at 11:57 AM on March 27 [2 favorites]

This isn't just one scenario - site updates - that needs a process change. It's a widespread pattern that needs to be reflected on, and I'm not sure the staff are fully recognizing that.
posted by sagc at 12:09 PM on March 27 [6 favorites]

Yeah, like I said, I'm not concerned with the site update. There would have been nothing wrong with just posting a message to the end of the last semi-update thread where the promise was made that just said "Oops, acknowledging that we have missed this, but as promised, here's a note that says we missed it."

It's not the information, it's the disrespect of promising something and then not acknowledging the promise.
posted by bowbeacon at 12:25 PM on March 27 [10 favorites]

If the mods aren't aware, there are a ton of to-do list services with a free tier that would cover the likely usage here. Don't overcomplicate things and try to find the perfect tool, just go sign up for Trello or some such and start adding notes.
posted by echo target at 1:30 PM on March 27 [4 favorites]

What steps are you taking towards that?

Goodness, you're tiresome

bowbeacon, you've made 2 FPPs and the same number of MeTa posts. You've made 12 comments on the blue in thirteen years but 298 comments on MeTa!

Why are you even on Metafilter? What possible pleasure could you be taking from a site where all you do is complain about shit not being done the way you want it to be done? Your only contributions make the place less appealing for everyone else to visit. You are not MetaFilter's parent.

I feel so sorry for the Mods on MF. What a horrible, thankless job.
posted by dobbs at 2:02 PM on March 27 [28 favorites]

Please don't presume to speak for others, dobbs. I'm glad this post was made, and I certainly wasn't aware of any "you must have participated thiiiiis much" rule for people to have opinions and critiques of the site. (I, for example, may look like I haven't participated much, but I've been here under a different name for years.)
posted by maryellenreads at 2:44 PM on March 27 [30 favorites]

It's not the information, it's the disrespect of promising something and then not acknowledging the promise.

I don't feel disrespected. though,
What steps are you taking towards that?

so is it disrespect when the it's admitted minus all those attributes that generally
define disrespect. is there malice, is there snarling, is there a satire, is there utter confusion, obfuscution, circumlocution, a social obtusian. Is it simply because it's a courtesy to inform as this is part of the job definition but by golly we make mistakes especially if the project might involve something different.

you don't care for the information but you do care for it's timely announcement, announcement of delayment, and what else?
posted by clavdivs at 2:49 PM on March 27 [3 favorites]

Fair enough. I’ll leave.
posted by bowbeacon at 2:53 PM on March 27

Please don't, bowbeacon.
posted by maryellenreads at 3:11 PM on March 27 [10 favorites]

Oh no, a vacuum. Time for me to be even worse.
posted by phunniemee at 3:33 PM on March 27 [12 favorites]

bowbacon, the volume of contributions one makes to the site, whether it’s a lot or a little has nothing to do with one’s enjoyment of the site. You have just as much right to ask about anything as anybody else. Please stick around.

dobbs, you may be frustrated but that was uncalled for.
posted by ashbury at 3:37 PM on March 27 [16 favorites]

Cool, good job driving off someone who’s been here since 2012. I’ve been here since 2011 and I’ve made 576 comments on the blue - does that qualify me to have an opinion? I’ve read just about every thread on the grey in the last several years and somehow, after everything, this weird purity test bullshit is what is finally making me pull the plug. Byeeeee
posted by skycrashesdown at 3:44 PM on March 27 [9 favorites]

Hey good news everyone I've crunched the numbers and dobbs, as someone who is quantitatively better than you at making friends and giving advice on Metafilter, I think you're talking out your ass.
posted by phunniemee at 3:54 PM on March 27 [8 favorites]

Discovery - google / social media
Attraction - The Archive
Interest - a community filtered web
Gating - two decades of prior activity
Joining - $5
someone who is good at user recruitment please help me funnel this my website is dying
posted by lucidium at 4:03 PM on March 27 [4 favorites]

I joined in 2010, and I've commented 3 entire times on the Blue. After a long hiatus, I felt compelled to log in to say that dobbs' comment really sucks. Last I checked, anyone who pays $5 (or has a good story, apparently) is allowed to comment freely here as long as they don't violate the rules of the community.
posted by easy, lucky, free at 4:13 PM on March 27 [24 favorites]

The ratio (not the raw numbers) of someones participation in MeTa vs the the other parts of the site does sort of speak to what they're here to do, and MeTa-ing orders of magnitude more than doing anything else is an odd use pattern. The obvious conclusions would be that someone is here for the grar or that someone is using a sockpuppet to express their gripes in MeTa, neither of those are great looks.
Believe me, I am just about the farthest from a "good vibes only" person as can be, but I never cease to be shocked at how entitled and demanding some MeFites can be towards site mods , management and our volunteer board members. I have gratitude towards every person who works to make this site what it is (as employees/volunteers) and gratitude towards all the users who share interesting things, help answer questions and share their insight. It's a rough time in MeFi's history and I really hope we can get over the hump and make it work.
posted by Larry David Syndrome at 4:18 PM on March 27 [9 favorites]

I'm going to half go against the grain here by saying that I don't think that the underlying idea of dobbs' comment was all that gross. If someone participates in MeFi almost entirely on the gray, almost entirely to complain, then, yeah, maybe they should spend their time at a site they don't hate. I don't think it's wrong to say that.

However!

Sure, bowbeacon only had 12 comments on the Blue. But they have 141 answers on the Green. So bowbeacon isn't an example of someone who participates in MeFi almost entirely on the gray, almost entirely to complain.

Honestly, I'm way more in line with what dobbs was complaining about (while I have more comments in the Blue than in the Gray, my recent comment history is like 99.99% Gray because this is the part of the site I find fascinating now). If dobbs railed against me for hanging out here, I'd fully understand.
posted by Bugbread at 4:22 PM on March 27 [11 favorites]

Those of you upset about my comment seem to be ignoring that it's not bowbeacon's lack of participation on the blue that I thought relevant, but their lack of participation in comparison to the seemingly constant complaints about the workings of the place.

My question was sincere: why bother coming here if you've got nothing to contribute but frustration and an unending list of things you think need to be fixed? Why go to the zoo to look at zookeepers?
posted by dobbs at 4:24 PM on March 27 [8 favorites]

People read, dobbs.
posted by phunniemee at 4:27 PM on March 27 [50 favorites]

People who do nothing else but read here have valid stake in the future of Metafilter, dobbs.
posted by phunniemee at 4:27 PM on March 27 [39 favorites]

dobbs, you seem to be choosing to ignore this, which Bugbread pointed out

Sure, bowbeacon only had 12 comments on the Blue. But they have 141 answers on the Green. So bowbeacon isn't an example of someone who participates in MeFi almost entirely on the gray, almost entirely to complain.

So your insistence that bowbeacon only used the site to complain is false.
posted by maryellenreads at 4:31 PM on March 27 [12 favorites]

I mean, all you have to do is click on bowbeacon's name to see their profile, and all their activity.
posted by maryellenreads at 4:32 PM on March 27 [4 favorites]

People can care about the site without constantly posting comments on blue.

The widespread hostility towards Meta among some folks is understandable but so counterproductive; there may be trolls but it's the only mechanism on the site for people in the community who care about the site to participate or discuss it. (No, emailing the board or the mods is not an alternative.)
posted by theclaw at 4:40 PM on March 27 [8 favorites]

It was a shitty personal attack of a comment regardless of how you weigh bowbeacon's profile activity.
posted by We had a deal, Kyle at 4:40 PM on March 27 [14 favorites]

In an attempt to re-rail, I agree with bowbeacon's premise for this metatalk. I've also noticed the patterns of mods (paid professional staff) promise things and not deliver. I feel like a broken record, but the management vacuum is the main cause. I would not be able to get away with repeated missed deadlines at my workplace. These Metatalk threads are the closest thing the site has to holding anyone accountable. Its not effective, and the site continues to wither away. In addition to the financials, I hope the Board, mods, someone is watching site activity closely. A shiny new site (not dragging that, its a great thing that is getting done) is not going to matter if there's nobody here to use it.

I hope you come back, bowbeacon.
posted by Sparky Buttons at 5:14 PM on March 27 [17 favorites]

Also, volunteer work gets done on Metafilter mostly ontime and mostly effectively. This is obvs personal for me, but shit, I've been doing about 3 hours' of work for Card Club, every month, for over 7 years. I've missed sending out addresses by the end of the month twice. I can't speak for our other volunteers,but this gets under my skin because yall get paid for what you do. I dont think a crabby metatalk is out of line to let yall know that professional integrity is important to some users. Feel free to check my credibility dobbs.
posted by Sparky Buttons at 5:20 PM on March 27 [25 favorites]

But Sparky, how can this be? Do you not as well have a full life? Such a thing has never been done!
posted by phunniemee at 5:28 PM on March 27 [10 favorites]

Judge me next, please! Give me a real dobbsin'!
posted by snofoam at 5:37 PM on March 27 [7 favorites]

snofoam, I checked and you favorite a lot of my comments on MeTa so clearly you aren’t here for good pure cool reasons like dobby-the-great is. Get a full life, go favorite shit on the blue like a Good User.
posted by donnagirl at 5:40 PM on March 27 [4 favorites]

Judge me next, please!

I went and looked so I could make a joke but got distracted by your instagram and now I'm looking at cactuses that look like dicks help
posted by phunniemee at 5:42 PM on March 27 [9 favorites]

On the bright side, bowbeacon was literally the only person on Metafilter who ever had any issue with paid staff not doing what they said they would do, so I guess everything is fine now.
posted by snofoam at 5:45 PM on March 27 [19 favorites]

The site is dying and the people in charge don’t seem to care.

The absolute lowest bar for “care,” to me, is meeting your own deadlines and being accountable when you miss them. Doing the thing when you say you'll do the thing is the bare minimum. And the staff hasn’t been doing that for years.

It's shitty that the staff treats the BIPOC committee the way they do. 'Post minutes shortly after a meeting' is the bare minimum. Posting minutes thirteen months later is a joke.

If the site is going to have committees like this, staff has to buy in. They aren’t. And they won’t.

You know what would be more respectful to the community than half-assing it? Just don’t do it at all.

And yeah to the casual MetaTalk reader that isn't watching this closely, it might just seem like mom and dad are fighting extra hard about the trash.

This isn’t about the trash. But while we're on the topic — take out the fucking trash.
posted by Diskeater at 5:46 PM on March 27 [13 favorites]

looking at cactuses that look like dicks help

there's actually a cactus here called a dildo cactus...and it's a totally different cactus from the dick cacti on my insta!
posted by snofoam at 5:49 PM on March 27 [3 favorites]

(snofoam, I am also really loving those pictures of the weird wormy-snake on Flickr!)
posted by karasu at 6:05 PM on March 27

Why go to the zoo to look at zookeepers?

Paging Dr. Zaius.
jebus. whilst taking umberage at "disrespect" I do not like using a members record or participation level or comments is an ndicator of what they can voice.

do not make me get out the Tamin dossier.
I assure anyone who's seen it's effect, it's like a basilisk, it doesn't care if you're naughty or nice. there could be a real issue here with this metatalk but I only see one or two examples of someone's failure to post an update which seemingly of ties into the all the other complaints, valid, invalid, mistaken or whatnot, as staff failure to meet members needs when it comes to interfunctionality within the site whether it's a technical issue or social.
I mean the best examples are all the dropped balls link. I would suggest dropping that term, dropped balls.

but dick jokes are cool too.
posted by clavdivs at 6:14 PM on March 27

The site is dying and the people in charge don’t seem to care.

If dobbs' comment was hyperbole, this is just as much so. Can we just all maybe not?
posted by pdb at 7:06 PM on March 27 [1 favorite]

If dobbs' comment was hyperbole,

My question was sincere
posted by dobbs at 6:24 PM on March 27
posted by phunniemee at 7:13 PM on March 27 [3 favorites]

I don't think the implication was that dobbs thought he was being hyperbolic, but that by pointing out bowbeacon's low Blue comment count (12) and ignoring his higher Green comment count (141) dobbs was understating bowbeacon's engagement on the site.
posted by Bugbread at 7:21 PM on March 27

Christ, what a bunch of assholes
posted by coriolisdave at 7:30 PM on March 27 [2 favorites]

People who point out everything going wrong with Metafilter can’t save it, and people who want to support the status quo can’t save it. It’s pretty unclear that anything could save it. Metafilter is like the desk in the basement office in The Wire where half the people are trying to move it into the room and half are trying to move it out, but actually bigger trends in the web and the world are stacked against it. I say live and let live. Point out serious issues, do uninhibited bolstering of the positives, it probably doesn’t matter.

(The snake is Indotyphlops braminus. They are all female and eat ants and are good at colonizing islands, but in a million years they will all be wiped out by some disease because they have no genetic diversity.)
posted by snofoam at 7:31 PM on March 27 [6 favorites]

;_; I was gonna guess glass lizard
posted by toodleydoodley at 7:33 PM on March 27

The snake is Indotyphlops braminus

when u complain about people yapping too much on MeTa this is what u look like btw
posted by phunniemee at 7:41 PM on March 27 [3 favorites]

mods should listen to Scotty
posted by Jacqueline at 7:41 PM on March 27

Here's what I truly don't understand. The users that think there's a loud, annoying, minority contingent on MeTa that's only here for the drama and otherwise everything is fine: is this what the site is like when everything is fine? Is it $250k / year fine?
posted by Diskeater at 8:48 PM on March 27 [9 favorites]

it's fine
posted by phunniemee at 8:56 PM on March 27 [6 favorites]

is this what the site is like when everything is fine? Is it $250k / year fine?

I dunno about the other $249,940 but I am still satisfied enough to leave my $5/month autopay running.

Like yeah things are a bit of a shitshow right now, but that's true of rest of the internet and the world in general. MetaFilter's downward trend is in line with the enshittification of the internet and breakdown of civil society over the past 5-to-10 years.

Are there any online communities with the size and scope of MetaFilter that are currently doing significantly better? Is there a reason we expect MetaFilter to be immune from everything getting worse everywhere?
posted by Jacqueline at 9:17 PM on March 27 [4 favorites]

Are there any online communities with the size and scope of MetaFilter that are currently doing significantly better?

Are there any online communities with the size and scope of MetaFilter that cost a quarter of a million dollars a year? This is a serious question.
posted by phunniemee at 9:20 PM on March 27 [15 favorites]

I agree with the premise of this post. Repeatedly making promises and breaking them erodes user trust, even if the promise seems insignificant. Just set a calendar reminder for gods sake! To write one sentence on the day you say you will!! It's not hard!!!
posted by Threeve at 9:39 PM on March 27 [6 favorites]

Threeve: "Just set a calendar reminder for gods sake!"

That's the rub, though, isn't it:

Brandon Blatcher: "I usually set a reminder or have note for that stuff, just forgot to do it this time around. "

Reminders only work if you set them, and if the problem is that you forget to set them in the first place, then it doesn't matter if it's a phone reminder or a post-it note or Trello or a rubber band around your wrist.
posted by Bugbread at 9:51 PM on March 27

Maybe we could rig up some sort of rube goldberg type contraption that triggers as soon as someone makes a comment asking where the update is and somewhere a thousand miles away a frozen pizza starts to defrost.
posted by phunniemee at 9:56 PM on March 27 [8 favorites]

free Adderall for all mods
posted by Jacqueline at 10:20 PM on March 27 [5 favorites]

📩🕛🕧🕐🕜🤔👉🚶🏃🤸🤵🤽⛲⛲🎡🕹️🎲📞🗣️🗣️🗣️🗣️👇⛹️🏋️🤸🏃🚶🌵🌵🔭🚨🚨🚨🚕🛬🌋🎇🎃👑🎩🕑🕝🕒🕗🕓🕟🗝️🚬🔔📢🚬⁉️↪️↪️↪️🆗🔛🍿💡📅

🍕
posted by clavdivs at 10:31 PM on March 27 [5 favorites]

Pet tax wall, you're our only hope!
posted by She Vaped An Entire Sock! at 2:23 AM on March 28 [2 favorites]

I would like to check in as a long-time quiet member, aka lurker. I got jumped in during the new-member flood of 2004, but I really started following Metafilter in 2001. (I only remember the time marker because the 9/11 thread was pivotal in my experience of that disaster.) Anyway, I've made a few snarky comments along the way, but mostly, I've read. Like, every day, for the past two and a half decades, I've read. And read. And read. Metafilter has been a cornerstone of my adult literacy, media and otherwise, and has in a very definite way shaped who I have become. I've never contributed much, but I'm so grateful for this community. (I did make one FPP, finally, mainly just to break my Metafilter virginity. I know virginity is a fake concept, don't come at me.) Anyway, thanks, y'all, I hope we can keep this thing going, it really means a lot to me. <3
posted by flod at 3:36 AM on March 28 [51 favorites]

I'm mostly a reader rather than a contributor, these days.

The issue with the user who left wasn't about reading vs commenting, or numbers of comments, or whether the site is well-run or not (it isn't). It was the months and months of relentless hostility, in every thread here, harsher and harsher. As well as demanding individuals lose their jobs, recently it crossed into accusing unpaid volunteers working on the site in their free time of being "negligent" for not reading every word of every comment. And then the first moment someone challenges him, suddenly he can't take it.
posted by Klipspringer at 6:46 AM on March 28 [4 favorites]

one person's relentless hostility is another's pointing out that the mods are very bad at their professed jobs
posted by sagc at 6:51 AM on March 28 [9 favorites]

(hope I have enough activity to be worthy of respect; don't forget to discount Ask replies for some reason!)
posted by sagc at 6:54 AM on March 28 [5 favorites]

And then the first moment someone challenges him, suddenly he can't take it.

What does this even mean? People have been crawling up Bowbeacon's ass for at least a year telling him he's being hostile, etc, for him giving a heck about the wellbeing of this website and asking for better from the paid staff of Metafilter.

Oh god actually this is so funny, the thread that stuck in my mind the most (because it was the one that got me to finally turn off my monthly donation) was the Fanfare thread from last May. I went back to that thread for a link to illustrate that people were giving Bowbeacon this same kind of crap consistently since even back then, and it's YOU. It's you, mate. Christ.
posted by phunniemee at 7:00 AM on March 28 [16 favorites]

About site updates and other summary reports -- if you have info on A, B, C and D, but not E, it's OK to have an update that includes only A-D, with a note that E will come later.
posted by NotLost at 7:00 AM on March 28 [4 favorites]

Yeah I remember that too, what a wild over-reaction to a delayed reply to a post about adding a year of release to fanfare posts, right?! He carries on dishing that out for year, calling for firings, gunning for volunteers — then dobbs gives him one comment back in the same tone he uses on others and he runs away.
posted by Klipspringer at 7:11 AM on March 28 [3 favorites]

then dobbs gives him one comment back in the same tone he uses on others and he runs away.

I disagree with this assessment. I have personally received repeated and strong negative feedback to how meaaaaaaan I am to the mods and I'm not nearly as vocal as Bowbeacon has been. He's been getting plenty of comments in that tone I have seen them. So that wasn't it, clearly.

What was so shitty about dobbs' comment was the implication that you don't get to care about Metafilter if you haven't crossed some kind of purity test of being a True Mefite, of which dobbs is apparently the arbiter. Why would you want to keep fighting for a community when someone in the community tells you you're not actually a part of it. Shitty! I think that's probably got more to do with why Bowbeacon left and not some "dish it out but can't take it" nonsense.
posted by phunniemee at 7:20 AM on March 28 [17 favorites]

Why would you want to keep fighting for a community when someone in the community tells you you're not actually a part of it.

Why would anyone want to volunteer for, or work for, a community when someone in the community tells you you're "stealing from the users" or "should be ashamed of themselves" or should "immediately resign" or be "relieved of their duties" or "negligent" (that last one aimed at volunteers).
posted by Klipspringer at 7:33 AM on March 28 [5 favorites]

mods should never be criticized for how they spend donor money

mods should never feel shame

mods cannot be fired no matter what; merely mentioning the possibility is a banning offense (remember when that was true?)

the board shouldn't bother to ever read meta

Sounds like a great site you're advocating for; real deep care for the community there. Mods have been ignoring reasonable concerns for years now; frustration - and increasingly sweeping solutions - make sense in that context.
posted by sagc at 7:41 AM on March 28 [9 favorites]

"negligent" (that last one aimed at volunteers)

That would be the interim board that's currently running the show.

I don't know that I would call them 'negligent' but it seems not totally out of order given....all of this.
posted by Diskeater at 7:57 AM on March 28 [1 favorite]

Klipspringer, your point about hostility is valid, and I think that it’s at the heart of dobbs’s comment as well. Bowbeacon is hostile. There are others who are also openly hostile and in this particular case, so was dobbs. I would have no problem at all if there was less hostility here.

Anger is not the same as hostility. If somebody tells me that they are angry at me for such and such a thing there’s a really good chance that I’ll actively listen and end up apologizing. If somebody came to me with hostility about the same thing it would be quite likely that I’m not going to listen because I’m perceiving that they want to beat me up.

There’s a lot of hostility in MetaTalk these days and it makes for some challenging reading, prevents people from engaging in the conversations and I think that it drives some people away.

As well, and it’s been talked about many times, people are scared to post on the blue because of the criticisms from fellow mefites, whether the comments were intended as criticism or not. As far as I’m concerned, the hostility that we see in MeTa is part of the same family as the critical comments on the blue. Like it or not, there are more than a few members here who have a high bar and are not shy of holding others to that standard.

MetaFilter is an online forum and its expected that people will behave very differently online than when face to face, and I believe that we are better than many similar communities in this regard but that doesn’t change the fact that sometimes, some people are really shitty to other people. I think that this is another aspect to the comments from some about how being a mod here is thankless - not everybody here has the same fire as others with regard to holding those responsible for the administration of the site.

Before anybody jumps on me, I'm not referring to the expectation that mods and administrators do their job following known guidelines, delivering on actions, meeting deadlines, managing finances, communicating with the membership regularly and relevantly, and etc. These are all things that need to be said, should be discussed and escalated.
posted by ashbury at 8:16 AM on March 28 [7 favorites]

Mod note: One comment above deleted. While we avoid deleting comments in MetaTalk, Name calling and personal attacks go against our content policy, please abide by it regardless of the subsite you are in.
posted by loup (staff) at 9:34 AM on March 28

So dobbs gets to make a shitty personal numbers-based attack on another member, but I can’t say things about dobbs? Coooooool.

It was the numbers, yeah? Like Brandon comparing his favorite count to mathowie’s? If we use numbers we can say bad things?
posted by donnagirl at 12:42 PM on March 28 [10 favorites]

It is my contention that dobbs’ comment was a personal attack on another user. It shouldn’t be allowed to stand except as evidence that dobbs can be mean enough to someone that they quit the site.

From the content policy linked by loup: “Pointing out that a statement is inappropriate or otherwise problematic is not name-calling.”

I think if the community guidelines aren’t followed as long as members appear to be defending the paid staff, then the paid staff aren’t the voices of reason and objectivity they pretend to be.
posted by donnagirl at 12:56 PM on March 28 [7 favorites]

Just delete MetaTalk already.
posted by ctmf at 1:40 PM on March 28 [5 favorites]

Like seriously, I'm making a motion for the new site to not have MetaTalk.
posted by ctmf at 1:43 PM on March 28 [3 favorites]

"I think if the community guidelines aren’t followed as long as members appear to be defending the paid staff, then the paid staff aren’t the voices of reason and objectivity they pretend to be."

cum hoc ergo propter hoc.
posted by clavdivs at 2:11 PM on March 28

Rename MetaTalk "MeFi(gh)t(e)Club"
posted by Jacqueline at 2:35 PM on March 28 [1 favorite]

dobbs: "Goodness, you're tiresome

bowbeacon, you've made 2 FPPs and the same number of MeTa posts. You've made 12 comments on the blue in thirteen years but 298 comments on MeTa!

Why are you even on Metafilter? What possible pleasure could you be taking from a site where all you do is complain about shit not being done the way you want it to be done? Your only contributions make the place less appealing for everyone else to visit. You are not MetaFilter's parent.

I feel so sorry for the Mods on MF. What a horrible, thankless job."



Thanks. I honestly feel this way every time I see one of these posts. There's a small but vocal shit all over the mostly very nice thing we have here and I just cannot understand the motivation. I'm glad I'm not the only one that feels this way.

The update came 2 days late this time and is a pretty frigging great update and it somehow netted out this lambasting.

To be honest I love this site but this small vocal minority is the thing that is driving me towards buttoning.
posted by chasles at 3:09 PM on March 28 [12 favorites]

Sigh. I kinda hate all of this. Whoever said up there about mom and dad fighting over the trash etc. I guess that's not far off, and I don't even know how I feel about Dobbs are calling someone out but I just cannot understand the vitriol that gets generated towards staff here.

I'll take this website with all it's warts over literally the entire rest of any website with user interactions. That's a true statement not hyperbole. I've deleted 100% of anything with a social interface. I hate it. I hate it all. Just fucking be nice to other humans. Even if theyre only letters on a screen.

So while some have a hard time with Dobbs up there i sure as hell hated the "ball dropped" link spree including where Loup made a very personal and vulnerable comment. Like seriously. What a nasty thing to include to make some grand point about how fucked up the moderators are. I found that despicable and gross.
posted by chasles at 3:22 PM on March 28 [8 favorites]

I'm making a motion for the new site to not have MetaTalk.

That'd be fine with me. I'm pretty exhausted by all of the can-I-speak-to-your-manager energy on MetaTalk. People litigating why we're doing a rebuild, demanding forensic explanations of why is there or isn't (or isn't yet), etc.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 4:24 PM on March 28 [29 favorites]

There is an enormous amount of [getting treated like shit] going around these days, and I want to believe in this community at least that the rest of that sentence is [because of ongoing systemic failure] and not [because of personally directed malice].

kirkaracha doesn't deserve to be on the front lines of translating coding technicalities to the masses, but we don't have the budget for a customer service layer. We all don't deserve the ouroboros of ire directed at a staff that doesn't have the resources to respond to a userbase that is worked into a fury by a lack of follow-through by a staff that etc etc.

The crowdsourced gaslighting that everything is guchi is the worst part of it.
posted by lucidium at 5:39 PM on March 28 [5 favorites]

kirkaracha: "I'm pretty exhausted by all of the can-I-speak-to-your-manager energy on MetaTalk. People litigating why we're doing a rebuild, demanding forensic explanations of why is there or isn't (or isn't yet), etc."
I'm sorry you have to deal with that, and I hope you know that there are plenty of people who appreciate what you're doing.
posted by Larry David Syndrome at 5:50 PM on March 28 [20 favorites]

chasles: "
The update came 2 days late this time and is a pretty frigging great update and it somehow netted out this lambasting."

I'd say it's a good update. If the P&L was included it'd be great. But there's....something going on with the finances of the site, hopefully we find out what soon.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 7:48 PM on March 28 [3 favorites]

That'd be fine with me. I'm pretty exhausted by all of the can-I-speak-to-your-manager energy on MetaTalk. People litigating why we're doing a rebuild, demanding forensic explanations of why is there or isn't (or isn't yet), etc.

I really, really don’t want this to be received as a jab at you, because I think the way you’ve approached this task and communicating with people about it has been admirable, and I’m pretty sure you’re not in it for the money because I’m pretty sure they are not paying top dollar for web development here. And as much as the general wisdom in software is “don’t rewrite it from scratch,” I have sympathy for the desire to rewrite this site from scratch because I have a hard time imagining the “customize something off the shelf” approach not stirring up a whole bunch more shit. And of course the rewrite is fait accompli, and you’re doing the best you can to make it a community project now.

But the way it kicked off, with a sudden announcement that we’re going to do a rewrite and site migration the hard[est] way really is symptomatic of the way this site just… lurches from one decision to the next, and from where I stand I think that approach to things inevitably set you up to be the one facing demands and “are we there yet” inquiries. I would hope it is something we can do better in the future.
posted by atoxyl at 11:54 PM on March 28 [20 favorites]

Great comment, atoxyl. I think kirkaracha is doing a great job dealing with the rebuild, and is getting undeserved hostility for putting his head over the parapet and talking to the users.

The problem isn't kirkaracha, the problem is that an absence of anyone with the power and responsibility for making decisions about the new site, he's been forced into acting as both developer and product manager.

E.g. there was a lot of heated debate about the question of multi-language support for the new site. As a developer, it should not be kirkaracha's job to try to wrangle consensus out of a bunch of angry users in Metatalk. It's not even clear that the people arguing at the bottom of week-old Metatalk threads are representative of the userbase as a whole.

Part of the failure to keep promises is that the staff leap into making promises without thinking about how they can fulfil them. Part of the decision to do a site rewrite should have been thinking about who is going to decide about the features and priorities of the new site.

Maybe a rewrite of the site with new custom code, rather than customizing existing forum software, was the best option. But there doesn't seem to have been any coherent decision-making process behind it. If I was deciding that I would want to know:

1. What are the custom features of Metafilter that are not available off-the-shelf?
2. What are the desirable off-the-shelf features we would get automatically?
3. What is the cost of adding the custom features as a plugin to off-the-shelf forum software?
4. What is the cost of a site rebuild?

As far as I can tell, nobody bothered to think about these things before deciding that a site rebuild was the best option. On a genuine community-driven site, I would have expected the users to be asked: do we want feature set A or feature set B? Should we spend X or should we spend Y? Instead the decision just... happened.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 12:27 AM on March 29 [11 favorites]

I think it's impractical to expect an organisation with the size and budget of Metafilter to procure software in the way that large businesses procure software.

Highly custom software is eyewateringly expensive, and at no point in Metafilter's history has it been able to afford to pay the going rate for it. Most companies can't! The reason that Metafilter is based on custom software anyway, is that it was written as a hobby by someone who just felt like it.

Metafilter cannot afford to pay market rates for engineers, and it also cannot afford to pay market rates for the kind of people who know how to hire and manage engineers or to direct engineering projects.

Because of this, the site is fully reliant on semi-volunteer labour to both manage and execute on any major software effort. And what that means, is that similar to any open source project, the only large pieces of work that can be done are things that are intrinsically fun or interesting enough to attract someone who will do it for below-market rates. And we'll only get things that are within the capabilities of whoever shows up to volunteer in this way.

Migrations off a custom platform onto something off-the-shelf are much less likely to come into this "fun" category. Such migrations are highly contentious (more so than a feature by feature rewrite), and most of the work involved is tedious. So while it might be strategically better for Metafilter to get away from the ongoing support burden of a custom solution, there is simply not the organisational capacity to manage or execute such a migration.

In this context, it's not at all surprising or unusual that the work we are getting is the work that someone happens to actually want to do. That's how all the projects out there without commercial backing normally work.

I don't think there's much point criticising current staff for not having a completely different management skillset than they actually have or were hired for, especially when it's a skillset that costs money that the company doesn't have.

What I do find interesting is this combination of an effectively open source project with a business entity that is financially reliant on the result. That's precarious, and it also requires some different kind of collaboration than a wholly commercial or wholly open source effort.
posted by quacks like a duck at 1:15 AM on March 29 [20 favorites]

the problem is that an absence of anyone with the power and responsibility for making decisions about the new site, he's been forced into acting as both developer and product manager.

Kybard has volunteered to be a project/product manager, and we're meeting on Friday.

Maybe a rewrite of the site with new custom code, rather than customizing existing forum software, was the best option.

Here's the thing: as I diplomatically put it, we have a very change-averse user base. I feel like that I've navigated that pretty successfully with the rebuild so far. I tried to replicate the current site, with some minor usability and accessibility changes.

The secret is, everyone wants an oompa-loompa now! When we announced the rebuild, people started asking for new features. When we opened the site for member testing, people asked for new features. Many esoteric ones.

Consequently:

I have a hard time imagining the “customize something off the shelf” approach not stirring up a whole bunch more shit.

Agreed, and personally I do not believe that skinning Discord or whatever would not appease the user base. Maybe someone could've proved me wrong a year ago.

As far as I can tell, nobody bothered to think about these things before deciding that a site rebuild was the best option.

I am really fucking tired of continually re-re-re-re-litigating this.

I’m pretty sure you’re not in it for the money because I’m pretty sure they are not paying top dollar for web development here

I'd be a sadsack fuckup if I were doing it for the money. I'm not complaining, because I know what I signed up for, but I get paid less than half of what I would bill for freelance work. I also don't bill all my hours.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 1:18 AM on March 29 [34 favorites]

Part of the failure to keep promises is that the staff leap into making promises without thinking about how they can fulfil them.

Repeating this for emphasis. I don't care much one way or the other about a new site. But I do care very much about the way the paid staff of Metafilter has completely wasted and squandered the efforts of the community, repeatedly. The steering committee. The bipoc board. The massive, site-saving fundraiser a few years ago. And for what. These people WiTh FuLl LiVeS put their time, effort, experience, literal money into a site that essentially said thanks for the cash, we'll consider your feedback at a future date 🗑️ and then funneled $20k to Bezos. Look at how many of those volunteers have since quit the site. It's fucking depressing.
posted by phunniemee at 5:07 AM on March 29 [18 favorites]

Also I just want to say that whoever stuck a STAFF tag on kirkaracha when the interim board gets to refuse a BOARD tag essentially put a kick me sign on the guy. It's misleading to the role he's working in here and makes it look like he's got more power over this than he does or (any) responsibility for the failures of site leadership.
posted by phunniemee at 5:11 AM on March 29 [29 favorites]

Wikipedia seems, from the outside, to do an incredible job at corralling a community of obsessive nerds into an organised decision-making process that delivers a successful product. Maybe we have some Wikipedian users who can teach us how they do it.
posted by Klipspringer at 5:20 AM on March 29 [1 favorite]

the interim board gets to refuse a BOARD tag

Wait, what?
posted by catspajamas at 6:00 AM on March 29 [4 favorites]

Yes, that's right. At least one member of the interim board in my memory has specifically said they don't want to be labeled as a board member (I wonder why) and that they would instead say "board member here" any time they're talking about board things. It's not listed on their profiles or anything. And unless I've misunderstood something, this is the one triad of people at all of Metafilter right now who owns it and has any actual power to make decisions. Effectively invisible on the site unless you follow seventeen clicks to subsection 14(c) of the faq and then remember the whole time.

Meanwhile, everything kirk says here is slapped with a staff label, even his jokes (which has already caused confusion), all because he's being underpaid to do a specific, limited scope piece of development work for Metafilter. Doesn't seem, you know, right.
posted by phunniemee at 6:16 AM on March 29 [17 favorites]

> Maybe we have some Wikipedian users who can teach us how they do it.

I have only glancing familiarity but iiiiit's... pretty dense. Like, if discussions here seem overly involved, have a skim of the current policy chat page.
posted by lucidium at 6:28 AM on March 29 [1 favorite]

phunniemee: "Yes, that's right. At least one member of the interim board in my memory has specifically said they don't want to be labeled as a board member (I wonder why) and that they would instead say "board member here" any time they're talking about board things. It's not listed on their profiles or anything. And unless I've misunderstood something, this is the one triad of people at all of Metafilter right now who owns it and has any actual power to make decisions. Effectively invisible on the site unless you follow seventeen clicks to subsection 14(c) of the faq and then remember the whole time."

I thought this was a classy, self deprecating move by 1adam12 and took it as a gesture to be seen as "just like any other user" when using the site in a non-board capacity. (In the sense that the people who seek power/leadership/prestige in a community are those that are often those who are least suited to that role and are doing it for self aggrandizing reasons- he was doing the exact opposite of that) Obviously, interpretations of the meaning of this gesture vary.... and I don't mean to speak for him, this was just my interpretation of why he may have chosen to be more discrete. It's no secret who the members of the board are, I'm not seeing any secret cabal here.
posted by Larry David Syndrome at 7:54 AM on March 29 [7 favorites]

Effectively invisible on the site unless you follow seventeen clicks to subsection 14(c) of the faq and then remember the whole time.

I mean it took me two clicks but ok.
posted by kbanas at 8:05 AM on March 29 [4 favorites]

For what it's worth, I do think there is a reasonable argument to be made that the FAQ should be one of the main menu list items, though, as opposed to nested under 'Contact Us'
posted by kbanas at 8:09 AM on March 29 [2 favorites]

I thought this was a classy, self deprecating move by 1adam12 and took it as a gesture to be seen as "just like any other user" when using the site in a non-board capacity.

Outside of the new site build, kirkaracha actually is any other user. Not "just like" but literally is. But the STAFF tag appended to every MeTa comment has already caused him to catch strays, in particular since he's been very communicative and responsive in most threads, and therefore the most visible MeFi official besides Brandon. Petition to upgrade kirk's badge to MEFI SIN EATER if anything.
posted by phunniemee at 8:12 AM on March 29 [7 favorites]

I'm a little confused by this interpretation. We were talking about a board member who declined the "board" tag (1adam12) and my interpretation of this gesture. I was in no way discussing kirkaracha.
posted by Larry David Syndrome at 8:49 AM on March 29 [2 favorites]

Okay but I was in all ways discussing kirkaracha. I brought up the board (and didn't name anybody) specifically in contrast to kirkaracha.
posted by phunniemee at 8:53 AM on March 29 [2 favorites]

For what it's worth, I do think there is a reasonable argument to be made that the FAQ should be one of the main menu list items, though, as opposed to nested under 'Contact Us'

The menus are generally a disaster. The FAQ is in the menu on the top left, underneath the logo and also on the very bottom right. We have four different places to find this kind of thing (top left menu, main top right menu, footer, top announcement bar) and there doesn't seem to be a lot of logic as to what goes where, which things are in two places (or even in two places in the same area). No wonder no one can find anything. The current solution of adding more links to the top announcement bar and ignoring the rest obviously isn't working very well.

I don't think this is a feature request for the new site exactly, but I have submitted it as one.
posted by ssg at 8:57 AM on March 29 [1 favorite]

phunniemee: "Okay but I was in all ways discussing kirkaracha. I brought up the board (and didn't name anybody) specifically in contrast to kirkaracha."

Fair enough, it seemed like you were suggesting that there was something off about 1ADAM12 keeping his board membership discrete (and how difficult it was to find this info on the site.) I was sharing my interpretation of 1ADAM12's decision to skip the board tag. and how I thought it spoke positively to his character. I did overlook the contrast you were setting up between him and kirk.

Has kirkaracha also asked to not have a staff tag and had one foisted on him without his consent? It seems like kind of an apples-and-oranges comparison unless this the case. I agree with you that he might catch more flak because the staff tag implies more decision making power than he has, but presumably it's his choice how he wants to be tagged. In this case, I took it as an honorary gesture to acknowledge his work in implementing the new site and he is an employee AFAIK.
posted by Larry David Syndrome at 9:30 AM on March 29 [2 favorites]

And now I'm becoming one of those people who is spending more time on MeTa than the rest of the site. Time to step back. :-)
posted by Larry David Syndrome at 9:32 AM on March 29

Larry David Syndrome: "And now I'm becoming one of those people who is spending more time on MeTa than the rest of the site."

If only we knew someone who was eager to do a numbers analysis and let us know if you’ve gone too far past the line to be worth keeping.
posted by donnagirl at 9:50 AM on March 29 [4 favorites]

Has kirkaracha also asked to not have a staff tag and had one foisted on him without his consent?

I have no idea, but he's here in this thread displaying obvious burnout about the demands and negativity he's catching about the new site, not just the details of the build but the broader leadership decisions that occurred prior even to his hire. One Weird Trick that might reduce that would be to remove the target off his name unless he's actually acting in his official capacity as a dev, on the clock, and ready to address user questions.
posted by phunniemee at 9:51 AM on March 29 [3 favorites]

Mod note: And unless I've misunderstood something, this is the one triad of people at all of Metafilter right now who owns it and has any actual power to make decisions. Effectively invisible on the site unless you follow seventeen clicks to subsection 14(c) of the faq and then remember the whole time.

FYI, there is now a link in the site navigation bar titled "Staff & Site Info" that links to a FAQ entry that has the staff box and general site information. It's accessible from every page and if people have suggestions about other information that can go in there, please let us know in the comments or via the Contact Us page.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 10:19 AM on March 29 [2 favorites]

Mod note: This isn't a great solution, true, but it's one that the staff can easily update, so that's a win, IMO.

The footer on the current site isn't easily editable, hence why it hasn't been updated in a long while.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 10:25 AM on March 29 [1 favorite]

I figure it's probably just a holdover from prior versions, but that "SITE OWNER" heading should probably be changed at some point, since non-profits really don't have owners. Maybe just reformat a touch so "MetaFilter Community Foundation Board" is the heading for that section, instead of being on the line below?
posted by nobody at 10:47 AM on March 29 [2 favorites]

I have no idea, but he's here in this thread displaying obvious burnout about the demands and negativity he's catching about the new site

I’m not Kirk, and I could have missed some things, but the nastiest I’ve seen anyone be to him by a wide margin was not on MetaFilter.

I feel like there’s long been some weirdness around the use or non-use of staff tags but this is more of a “person who does the most to go out there and tries to engage is rewarded with being the focus of negative engagement, too” situation.
posted by atoxyl at 11:07 AM on March 29 [2 favorites]

on my phone and don't have the time to get into some meatier stuff here but to address one thing:

so is it easy on the current site to give a custom tag other than "staff"? it would make sense to me if so to give kirk a tag that reads "site rebuild" or some such, to clarify his scope and differentiate him from e.g. mods.

if that's not easy I do think it'd be better if he didn't have a badge at all, at least for now
posted by Kybard at 1:06 PM on March 29 [4 favorites]

I figure it's probably just a holdover from prior versions, but that "SITE OWNER" heading should probably be changed at some point, since non-profits really don't have owners. Maybe just reformat a touch so "MetaFilter Community Foundation Board" is the heading for that section, instead of being on the line below?


Done and added some anchors so it's visible that staff and committee information is on the page.

so is it easy on the current site to give a custom tag other than "staff"?

Probably not hard, but has to be done by frimble is my guess. Leaving that tokirkaracha to talk to loup about.

Might be good to do if there's someone being a project manager. Also a question of whether to change frimble's tag from staff to something else.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 1:32 PM on March 29 [3 favorites]

I love MEFI SIN EATER but maybe too on the nose? I'm fine with STAFF, DEV, something else, or no tag.

The menus are generally a disaster.

The whole thing could use some lovin' from a user interface designer.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 2:03 PM on March 29 [12 favorites]

so is it easy on the current site to give a custom tag other than "staff"? it would make sense to me if so to give kirk a tag that reads "site rebuild" or some such, to clarify his scope and differentiate him from e.g. mods.

Mods and developers are both staff -- employees. If you want to make a distinction, make it between mods and devs, not between "staff" and "devs", because the latter is a subset of the former.

But also, maybe the tag should be turned off when the person is responding on their own, and not representing MeFi?
posted by NotLost at 8:11 AM on March 30 [1 favorite]

But also, maybe the tag should be turned off when the person is responding on their own, and not representing MeFi?

On that note, I would really love if ALL staff use the "outline box" when they are speaking in official capacity. It is too easy for an official position/policy to be missed if someone is just scrolling through or if they are trying to find something from a past MeTa that sounds like official policy without seeing that box.

Here is just one example from this thread that is one of the staff speaking as staff but not really noted as such.

And, as an aside... that comment says, "The footer on the current site isn't easily editable, hence why it hasn't been updated in a long while."

which, to me, why??? why is it so hard to edit? View source seems to make it look like one line of CSS or HTML? Why can only one person edit it? What if they get hit by a bus?

And, to get back to the original thought of this post, why are we still having the same issues all the time? The "flag" thing took how many years? Publishing BIPOC minutes got to over a year. We're still waiting on a community created cookbook for how long now? The initial excuse was that the community member who was going to do it had things come up. Yet, at least one other volunteered to take over but was shut down to let the first person still attempt to finish.

It's chump change. It's all chump change. But, it all adds up to a lot of goodwill lost.

tl;dr - I want a cookbook. I want accountability. Will pay for both.
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 9:16 AM on March 30 [4 favorites]

a non mouse, a cow herd: "Here is just one example from this thread that is one of the staff speaking as staff but not really noted as such."

I do see the "ex cathedra" box on the comment you link.
posted by Klipspringer at 9:30 AM on March 30

Mod note: I do see the "ex cathedra" box on the comment you link.

Yep, I fixed that, 'a non mouse, a cow herd' was not seeing things when they made that comment

which, to me, why??? why is it so hard to edit? View source seems to make it look like one line of CSS or HTML? Why can only one person edit it? What if they get hit by a bus?

And, to get back to the original thought of this post, why are we still having the same issues all the time? The "flag" thing took how many years? Publishing BIPOC minutes got to over a year. We're still waiting on a community created cookbook for how long now? The initial excuse was that the community member who was going to do it had things come up. Yet, at least one other volunteered to take over but was shut down to let the first person still attempt to finish.

The code of the current site is a mess and done using a lot techniques from an earlier era of coding, where a lot of current practices just did not exist. Roughly speaking as an a non-developer, I think that analogy is this: Previously everything was hand coded, and I do mean everything, even seemingly common elements (like a footer,) were reproduced a number of times (the footer is at the bottom of every page).

Now imagine having to go into every single one of those different pages that the footer appears on, just to change one or two links. That may be decided to not be worth the time for part time developer to do, especially when there's other stuff going on.

Nowadays templates are built into a content management system (CMS), so that a non-developer has access to a single page where the template is and can just go into that one page to edit that template and those changes are immediately applied wherever that template is being used on the site.

That MetaFilter is more like the former, than the latter is frustrating for everyone, but it is what it is. That's not me being flip, just recognizing that a lot of things with the current site are what they are and are not going to change, hence rebuilding the site.

I think a lot of that also influenced general practices with the staff over time. A "we can't move fast, so we don't move fast". That is my personal opinion and expect that'll change with the new site (note how quickly the missing line around an official mod note was changed and as the person who made the change, it was super easy), which will allow general staff to change things on the site without having to go through a part-time developer aka much quicker.


There are number of complaints mentioned in your comment and I can't reply to every single one because I don't know all the details. But I will express my opinion about late things with the BIPOC Board.

Yes, it took a while and that was frustrating, but I think it's ok, while also noting the Board has changed its practice of doing meeting minutes, they're much more concise.

But asking or demanding that a group that is dedicated to helping people who may feel silenced in life and on this site to 'be quicker' isn't all that helpful to those people. In fact those very public demands may encourage people to disengage and move slower. Not a great result, sure, but a very human one.

Finally, I do think things are getting better. The very comment and "broken promise" that prompted this MeTa post were actually part of a longer comment where I was talking about working on document to make information users were requesting more visible.

So yes, something was promised and didn't happen. But work and improvements are being done and happening and I would encourage everyone to think of things on a larger site level scale and opposed to always focusing on one particular thing. That doesn't mean mistakes shouldn't be publicly called out. Just try to look at the large picture and when improvements are being made, to note that publically also.


posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 10:28 AM on March 30 [2 favorites]

Mod note: Note that I'm off this coming week, starting two hours or so ago, so things may be slower this week (neither Taz or myself will be around), so just have patience, thanks!
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 10:30 AM on March 30

Ha, I got a little curious about this and yeah Brandon's comment didn't have the "mod note" border when "a non mouse, a cow herd" saw it and posted their comment at 4:16pm GMT.

But, after non-mouse's comment, a mod changed the comment into a mod note (to be strictly accurate, this happened some time between 4:13pm GMT and 4.35pm GMT). Mystery resolved!

The official mod log doesn't show the action of changing mod note status, because it's not actually a log of mod actions, it's a list of comments that currently have "mod note" status (and posts that are currently set to "deleted").

But looking at my archive I can see that the comment was added to the mod log at 4:35pm GMT today and it wasn't on the mod log when we checked at 4:13pm.

The real mod log on the new site should be immutable and should record mod actions not just the current status of mod notes and deleted posts, imo. (But it's fully understandable that the current one doesn't, within the constraints of the current site's creaking backend.)
posted by Klipspringer at 10:31 AM on March 30 [3 favorites]

And now Brandon has confirmed. (I hadn't seen Brandon's comment when writing mine). Mystery thoroughly resolved.
posted by Klipspringer at 10:34 AM on March 30

Previously everything was hand coded, and I do mean everything, even seemingly common elements (like a footer,) were reproduced a number of times (the footer is at the bottom of every page).

That hurts just to read. Thanks for this detail, I think it helps explain why some things are as they are, which is difficult for folks to understand (because who would even imagine the situation would be that bad). I was going to say that DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) has been around forever, but apparently the book that popularized is came out a few months after MetaFilter launched.
posted by ssg at 10:55 AM on March 30

But asking or demanding that a group that is dedicated to helping people who may feel silenced in life and on this site to 'be quicker' isn't all that helpful to those people.

If that is a reply to my comment, that is an awful misrepresentation. I hope you enjoy your week off.
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 12:18 PM on March 30 [5 favorites]

Brandon Blatcher: "I can't reply to every single one because I don't know all the details. But I will express my opinion about late things with the BIPOC Board." (emphasis added)
Something to think about as we move to (maybe, eventually) a more volunteer-based workforce is the importance of keeping 'member voice' and 'official voice' separate. Not slagging off at Brandon at all, but this is a clear example of getting the two mixed up. Personal opinions have no place in a comment clearly marked as 'official' information. People who have official voices should also be allowed and enabled to contribute 'as themselves' as well.

Have I submitted a feature request for the new site? Why, yes, I have, but thanks for asking.
posted by dg at 4:36 PM on March 30 [3 favorites]

Okay. I stepped away for a couple of hours. Had a nap. I am still really, really angry. Not that my words are going to be heard since 'Brandon Blatcher' will be gone for a week but....

I do see the "ex cathedra" box on the comment you link.

Yep, I fixed that, 'a non mouse, a cow herd' was not seeing things when they made that comment

I haven't seen the ' used for usernames before, but whatever. The point I was making is that staff, ESPECIALLY 'Brandon Blatcher' do not use the box when they are speaking as staff versus their own personal opinion. That was just one of two that was easily found just in this post. There are typically multiple ones in each MeTa post.

Roughly speaking as an a non-developer, I think that analogy is this: Previously everything was hand coded, and I do mean everything, even seemingly common elements (like a footer,) were reproduced a number of times (the footer is at the bottom of every page).

Okay, thanks non-dev. You are wrong. If everything was hand coded, posts would not show up immediately. That is just the most obvious example. I haven't looked at the code base, but doing a find/replace across templates to remove "steering committee" is not a huge chore. I specifically mentioned "flag" in my comment because of this. Yes, it was implemented differently across subsites (but CERTAINLY not hand coded to every single page), so it took years to replace to make a consistent site. If a Dev wants to tell me why we can't just pull a line of HTML that it is obsolete and shouldn't be reproduced on the refactor, I'm all ears.

Nowadays templates are built into a content management system (CMS)

Your condescension is nauseating.

note how quickly the missing line around an official mod note was changed and as the person who made the change, it was super easy)

The "missing line" is happening on the old site. You made it happen on "the old site". I am asking you to use it every time you are speaking as a staff member. That ability has been there for YEARS!!!!

There are number of complaints mentioned in your comment and I can't reply to every single one because I don't know all the details.

I think "bad faith" is used in conversations here a lot more than necessary, but... c'mon.

Here are my "complaints" that I have not already discussed.

1. Why is it taking so long to take to publish a community created cookbook?
2. Why has it taken so long to take publish BIPOC minutes?

But asking or demanding that a group that is dedicated to helping people who may feel silenced in life and on this site to 'be quicker' isn't all that helpful to those people. In fact those very public demands may encourage people to disengage and move slower. Not a great result, sure, but a very human one.

wow. just, wow.

Again, if this was addressed to my comment, I did not have that intent at all. It is a really awful interpretation of what I said.

stepping away again. hope y'all enjoy your evening.
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 5:25 PM on March 30 [4 favorites]

Brandon Blatcher did a great job explaining some of the challenges in making updates on the new site.

One of my main goals with the new site is to let the mods quickly and easily make updates that currently need a developer to do.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 5:28 PM on March 30 [4 favorites]

a really awful interpretation of what I said.

There is a lot of that going around. But being really, really angry is a choice
posted by ginger.beef at 5:53 PM on March 30 [3 favorites]

2. Why has it taken so long to take publish BIPOC minutes?

There has been extensive discussion about the BIPOC board minutes, especially in this recent thread. The work to create the minutes (and causes of delay) are described by cendawanita here and aielen here
posted by LizBoBiz at 1:14 AM on March 31 [2 favorites]