Unnecessary callout December 14, 2004 5:35 PM Subscribe
Biffa wrote to me "Lots of people don't read NYT or slashdot and neither of these have a relationship with MeFi such that links can be regarded as exclusive. Perhaps you should focus more on finding some good links for yourself rather than trying to Metapolice with what appears to be your first contribution of any kind as a member. And take it to MeTa if you have any further problem with it." [http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/37810]
I've been reading metafilter for three years and I feel qualified to make my comment. I re-checked this page before I posted: http://mssv.net/wiki.cgi?WhatIsABadPost
If that page is incorrect, then perhaps someone should change what is stated before handing out conflicting advice. I figured Slashdot and the lead article of the NYTs (and this isn't life and death news) weren't FP material. But perhaps I'm wrong.
I've been reading metafilter for three years and I feel qualified to make my comment. I re-checked this page before I posted: http://mssv.net/wiki.cgi?WhatIsABadPost
If that page is incorrect, then perhaps someone should change what is stated before handing out conflicting advice. I figured Slashdot and the lead article of the NYTs (and this isn't life and death news) weren't FP material. But perhaps I'm wrong.
You read for three years and your first comment is some stupid snark about how bad an FPP is? Then you start a lame metatalk thread hoping to again discuss the wonders of the rabid newsfilter vs. anti-newsfilter debate? Welcome aboard. You'll fit in nicely.
posted by The God Complex at 5:43 PM on December 14, 2004
posted by The God Complex at 5:43 PM on December 14, 2004
You can create links in your text using HTML:
Biffa <A HREF="http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/37810">wrote to me</A>
posted by grouse at 5:44 PM on December 14, 2004
Biffa <A HREF="http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/37810">wrote to me</A>
posted by grouse at 5:44 PM on December 14, 2004
I've been reading metafilter for three years and I feel qualified to make my comment.
But apparently not MetaTalk for the past three weeks.
posted by eyeballkid at 5:45 PM on December 14, 2004
But apparently not MetaTalk for the past three weeks.
posted by eyeballkid at 5:45 PM on December 14, 2004
I don't read /. or NYT. I basically get my info fill from the 'Blue so I didn't mind seeing this. That's just me though. Should I read Slashdot? I dunno. I don't really have the time. I thought it was an intersting post but knew straight away it would generate some sort of war based on people's opinions expressed previously.
That's just what I reckon.
On preview: You're wrong ;)
posted by bdave at 5:48 PM on December 14, 2004
That's just what I reckon.
On preview: You're wrong ;)
posted by bdave at 5:48 PM on December 14, 2004
For the record, I leave you this:
1. There are not rules, just guidelines. There have been countless exceptions to every guideline over the years.
2. If you've been reading for three years, you'd know that this has been discussed to death, unless you've never read the grey before.
3. Seriously, dude, for these to be the first two things you want to give to the community, well... Let's just say there are enough whining pedants here already who scamper with much delight, keen to define every nuance of behaviour on metafilter.
4. Seriously. No rules.
5. There aren't rules, just advice. The no-rule thing isn't even a rule, just a guideline to the guidelines.
posted by The God Complex at 5:49 PM on December 14, 2004
1. There are not rules, just guidelines. There have been countless exceptions to every guideline over the years.
2. If you've been reading for three years, you'd know that this has been discussed to death, unless you've never read the grey before.
3. Seriously, dude, for these to be the first two things you want to give to the community, well... Let's just say there are enough whining pedants here already who scamper with much delight, keen to define every nuance of behaviour on metafilter.
4. Seriously. No rules.
5. There aren't rules, just advice. The no-rule thing isn't even a rule, just a guideline to the guidelines.
posted by The God Complex at 5:49 PM on December 14, 2004
Yeah, well.
I don't think it's a big deal. It -was- a hott post.
And I hadn't seen it. Chill out a bit.
I mean... your first action in three years is to go try to get someone publicly crucified on MeTa on a technicality.
On preview:
What you all said.
And you're wrong.
posted by Count Ziggurat at 5:53 PM on December 14, 2004
I don't think it's a big deal. It -was- a hott post.
And I hadn't seen it. Chill out a bit.
I mean... your first action in three years is to go try to get someone publicly crucified on MeTa on a technicality.
On preview:
What you all said.
And you're wrong.
posted by Count Ziggurat at 5:53 PM on December 14, 2004
I don't read slashdot or the New York Times, either. As long as a post isn't already at the top of this page, I don't mind it.
Three years of lurking doesn't qualify you to be rude, and then complain about it.
And get this: there are posts on the "front page" that--if they don't look interesting to me--I don't read! Wotta concept!
posted by interrobang at 5:54 PM on December 14, 2004
Three years of lurking doesn't qualify you to be rude, and then complain about it.
And get this: there are posts on the "front page" that--if they don't look interesting to me--I don't read! Wotta concept!
posted by interrobang at 5:54 PM on December 14, 2004
It was huge, huge news, and worthy of posting here. And to top it off, the poster tracked down several bits about it, instead of a single link to a news story.
Sometimes mainstream news is major enough to go beyond simple boring newsfilter stuff. This is one of those times.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 5:57 PM on December 14, 2004
Sometimes mainstream news is major enough to go beyond simple boring newsfilter stuff. This is one of those times.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 5:57 PM on December 14, 2004
I've been reading metafilter for three years and I have no fucking clue how to create a hyperlink!
posted by Kwantsar at 6:14 PM on December 14, 2004
posted by Kwantsar at 6:14 PM on December 14, 2004
Oh, and about_time, when you say that "someone" should change the what-is-a-bad-link page... you know that that's a wiki page, and that you can change the text of that page however your heart desires? I'll leave the how as an exercise for you to figure out...
posted by delfuego at 6:16 PM on December 14, 2004
posted by delfuego at 6:16 PM on December 14, 2004
If you knew how to do a link tag, your critique might not have seemed so ludicrous.
but then again it might have
And ignore what delfuego said. You are forbidden to change a word of the wiki until you learn basic html.
posted by Sidhedevil at 6:34 PM on December 14, 2004
but then again it might have
And ignore what delfuego said. You are forbidden to change a word of the wiki until you learn basic html.
posted by Sidhedevil at 6:34 PM on December 14, 2004
I figured Slashdot and the lead article of the NYTs (and this isn't life and death news) weren't FP material. But perhaps I'm wrong.
I think you're missing the point altogether. It seems to me that the major objection to your comment and this post is that:
1) this is a community
2) No matter how long you have been reading, we know nothing about you
3) Your first few comments, like first impressions, help to quickly establish your identity around here which is important for many reasons, including helping establish your sense of authority and whether people should listen to anything you say
4) Coming out and slamming a post as your first comment does not create a wonderful first impression. Neither does this Metatalk thread.
As TGC points out, none of this is really written down. Why? I think because it falls under the general heading of "etiquette" Etiquette is a set of unwritten rules about behaving in a society. Its too complex to really lay down as rules and relies instead on the complex, social sense that comes naturally (in varying degrees) to most people. It relies on intuition.
Also, no matter how many rules you lay down or books you try to write about it, some people will never get it. Strict rules in this case, rarely help.
posted by vacapinta at 6:59 PM on December 14, 2004
I think you're missing the point altogether. It seems to me that the major objection to your comment and this post is that:
1) this is a community
2) No matter how long you have been reading, we know nothing about you
3) Your first few comments, like first impressions, help to quickly establish your identity around here which is important for many reasons, including helping establish your sense of authority and whether people should listen to anything you say
4) Coming out and slamming a post as your first comment does not create a wonderful first impression. Neither does this Metatalk thread.
As TGC points out, none of this is really written down. Why? I think because it falls under the general heading of "etiquette" Etiquette is a set of unwritten rules about behaving in a society. Its too complex to really lay down as rules and relies instead on the complex, social sense that comes naturally (in varying degrees) to most people. It relies on intuition.
Also, no matter how many rules you lay down or books you try to write about it, some people will never get it. Strict rules in this case, rarely help.
posted by vacapinta at 6:59 PM on December 14, 2004
Well said vacapinta. The unwritten rules always take a little time to digest. Tread lightly at the beginning as with any social interaction with an established community and everything should be fine.
posted by caddis at 7:11 PM on December 14, 2004
posted by caddis at 7:11 PM on December 14, 2004
If we were to take the rules literally, we couldn't talk about anything that had appeared in NYT or Slashdot. Now does really that make any sense?
While Newsfilter posts are generally frowned upon, allowances are always made for subjects the community finds interesting. Being able to identify such topics is one of those gray areas -- no pun intended -- that one must develop a sense for.
I'd wager that most people here think Google making mass quantities of library books available online in some form. So pooh-poohing the original post backfires, as you've seen.
posted by pmurray63 at 7:35 PM on December 14, 2004
While Newsfilter posts are generally frowned upon, allowances are always made for subjects the community finds interesting. Being able to identify such topics is one of those gray areas -- no pun intended -- that one must develop a sense for.
I'd wager that most people here think Google making mass quantities of library books available online in some form. So pooh-poohing the original post backfires, as you've seen.
posted by pmurray63 at 7:35 PM on December 14, 2004
How is this different from yesterday's I don't care about your damn iPod products?
Why do we need to hear about everything that Google does?
Google Desktop Search Beta, Google SMS, the terrible Google adds wishlists to Froogle post, Google intends to index libraries at some future date, etc etc etc... Can we stop shilling for Google already?
posted by rajbot at 7:36 PM on December 14, 2004
Why do we need to hear about everything that Google does?
Google Desktop Search Beta, Google SMS, the terrible Google adds wishlists to Froogle post, Google intends to index libraries at some future date, etc etc etc... Can we stop shilling for Google already?
posted by rajbot at 7:36 PM on December 14, 2004
How is this different from yesterday's I don't care about your damn iPod products?
The difference is that most of us already know that 'tex is kind of a jerk, and we don't know this guy at all.
posted by interrobang at 7:38 PM on December 14, 2004
The difference is that most of us already know that 'tex is kind of a jerk, and we don't know this guy at all.
posted by interrobang at 7:38 PM on December 14, 2004
Can we stop shilling for Google already?
Not quite yet.
posted by bitpart at 7:58 PM on December 14, 2004
Not quite yet.
posted by bitpart at 7:58 PM on December 14, 2004
Well, my apologies to everyone I've pissed off, which was never my intention. Hopefully I can do better in the future.
posted by about_time at 8:26 PM on December 14, 2004
posted by about_time at 8:26 PM on December 14, 2004
Yes, going into it with great hope in your heart, perhaps you will.
posted by interrobang at 8:28 PM on December 14, 2004
posted by interrobang at 8:28 PM on December 14, 2004
In fact, I'm sure you will! Say, gang, let's stop beating up on this guy! Let's all be real positive about the new people, who I love, mostly!
posted by interrobang at 8:29 PM on December 14, 2004
posted by interrobang at 8:29 PM on December 14, 2004
That's the spirit!
posted by interrobang at 8:40 PM on December 14, 2004
posted by interrobang at 8:40 PM on December 14, 2004
Kwantsar, don't forget that until further notice, I am affecting a nasal, transatlantic accent.
And I don't hate you, fella! I think you're aces!
posted by interrobang at 8:44 PM on December 14, 2004
And I don't hate you, fella! I think you're aces!
posted by interrobang at 8:44 PM on December 14, 2004
This was on NYT and slashdot... Is it worth reposting on mefi?
A) Don't make this kind of comment in the thread itself. That's called "shitting in a thread" and is bad bad for all of us. It's the reason MetaTalk exists.
B) I think I agree with biffa about NYT and SlashDot - you're not required to check those sources before posting here. Personally, I don't read either regularly and don't feel that I should have to in order to enjoy MeFi.
C) Yes this story was everywhere, so I sympathize with your point. Stories about really interesting things that merit discussion border on a grey area in this regard.
If that last one is confusing you, refer to the words "grey area." I can't make that any clearer, unfortunately.
posted by scarabic at 9:26 PM on December 14, 2004
A) Don't make this kind of comment in the thread itself. That's called "shitting in a thread" and is bad bad for all of us. It's the reason MetaTalk exists.
B) I think I agree with biffa about NYT and SlashDot - you're not required to check those sources before posting here. Personally, I don't read either regularly and don't feel that I should have to in order to enjoy MeFi.
C) Yes this story was everywhere, so I sympathize with your point. Stories about really interesting things that merit discussion border on a grey area in this regard.
If that last one is confusing you, refer to the words "grey area." I can't make that any clearer, unfortunately.
posted by scarabic at 9:26 PM on December 14, 2004
Aces? Why, he's the bees knees... the 'p' in udding and an all around swell fella. He's our kind of guy and I say, bravo!
Bravo, brave Kwanstar and rail, rail I say against the dieing light. Do not go quietly, for it is the empire at stake and what is good for Britain is good for the world!
Damn, would somebody get that mad dog out of the sun, it's gone to his head. To his head, I say.
posted by cedar at 9:28 PM on December 14, 2004
Bravo, brave Kwanstar and rail, rail I say against the dieing light. Do not go quietly, for it is the empire at stake and what is good for Britain is good for the world!
Damn, would somebody get that mad dog out of the sun, it's gone to his head. To his head, I say.
posted by cedar at 9:28 PM on December 14, 2004
Your first few comments, like first impressions, help to quickly establish your identity around here which is important for many reasons, including helping establish your sense of authority and whether people should listen to anything you say
If you really believe that establishing your "authority" on a web site or worrying if the members of metafilter will listen to you it might be time to step away from the computer.
posted by justgary at 9:29 PM on December 14, 2004
If you really believe that establishing your "authority" on a web site or worrying if the members of metafilter will listen to you it might be time to step away from the computer.
posted by justgary at 9:29 PM on December 14, 2004
I've been reading metafilter for three years
the lead article of the NYTs
*cough*
posted by soyjoy at 9:34 PM on December 14, 2004
the lead article of the NYTs
*cough*
posted by soyjoy at 9:34 PM on December 14, 2004
I heard it on NPR before I read on metafilter. Good work guys.
posted by puke & cry at 9:38 PM on December 14, 2004
posted by puke & cry at 9:38 PM on December 14, 2004
Also, I'd like to encourage everyone to stop using their lurk time as some kind of credential. It's not one.
I know you think you must have read every single word every single day before you had an account, and therefore really know what was really going on. But for one thing, I bet you're exaggerating that. More importantly, viewing just isn't the same as interacting. You simply don't learn as much when you're not participating, you don't grow as much when you're detached, and you don't care as much when you're not accountable. You also have no investment or stake in the site as you've put nothing of yourself into it. It simply isn't the same at all, and I'm tired of hearing that it *almost* is.
I also don't care much that you've spent 15 years on Usenet. There's a reason I'm here and not there.
posted by scarabic at 9:39 PM on December 14, 2004
I know you think you must have read every single word every single day before you had an account, and therefore really know what was really going on. But for one thing, I bet you're exaggerating that. More importantly, viewing just isn't the same as interacting. You simply don't learn as much when you're not participating, you don't grow as much when you're detached, and you don't care as much when you're not accountable. You also have no investment or stake in the site as you've put nothing of yourself into it. It simply isn't the same at all, and I'm tired of hearing that it *almost* is.
I also don't care much that you've spent 15 years on Usenet. There's a reason I'm here and not there.
posted by scarabic at 9:39 PM on December 14, 2004
That's called "shitting in a thread"
Not by all of us. Some of us have actually had the neurons whose job it is to process the word "shit" get completely burned out by reading too many SethSnarks.
posted by George_Spiggott at 9:40 PM on December 14, 2004
Not by all of us. Some of us have actually had the neurons whose job it is to process the word "shit" get completely burned out by reading too many SethSnarks.
posted by George_Spiggott at 9:40 PM on December 14, 2004
scarabic: I'm not going to quote you or do all that fancy HTML nonsense, but I do want to know one thing. What makes you think that 'time of membership' has anything to do with a persons ability or willingness to contribute to the site?
I have a pretty low user number and have been coming around here for pretty much as long as MeFi has existed. I do it on and off and haven't made an effort to be 'known'. I expect that I'm not alone in this and the daily posters are a small minority of the MeFi membership. Considering the number of new members that are actively participating I'm thinking that in a very few weeks many of them will surpass my total contribution over several years.
This isn't a bad thing. They care and I don't. It may make for a few rocky weeks during the transition but to diminish their contributions is folly. They are us and sooner or later we'll be outnumbered... adjust or perish.
You can't train them, they aren't puppies. All you can do is set an example and looking over the site in the last couple of weeks it's obvious that we're not doing a very good job. Let's just give them a chance and it's entirely possible we'll all be better off -- except for the few that have built personas around being MeFi iconoclasts -- you folks just need to get lives.
posted by cedar at 10:17 PM on December 14, 2004
I have a pretty low user number and have been coming around here for pretty much as long as MeFi has existed. I do it on and off and haven't made an effort to be 'known'. I expect that I'm not alone in this and the daily posters are a small minority of the MeFi membership. Considering the number of new members that are actively participating I'm thinking that in a very few weeks many of them will surpass my total contribution over several years.
This isn't a bad thing. They care and I don't. It may make for a few rocky weeks during the transition but to diminish their contributions is folly. They are us and sooner or later we'll be outnumbered... adjust or perish.
You can't train them, they aren't puppies. All you can do is set an example and looking over the site in the last couple of weeks it's obvious that we're not doing a very good job. Let's just give them a chance and it's entirely possible we'll all be better off -- except for the few that have built personas around being MeFi iconoclasts -- you folks just need to get lives.
posted by cedar at 10:17 PM on December 14, 2004
What makes you think that 'time of membership' has anything to do with a persons ability or willingness to contribute to the site?
Whoa, whoa, whoa. I didn't say that. I have never said that. I said that lurking was not a credential. Not the same thing. I wouldn't take your low user number as an automatic credential either, for the reasons you describe. Then again, I haven't heard anyone here say "I've got a low user number so I feel qualified to make my comment." I have, however, heard several people attribute weight to their opinion based on the time they've been lurking here, and that just doesn't track for me.
posted by scarabic at 10:44 PM on December 14, 2004
Whoa, whoa, whoa. I didn't say that. I have never said that. I said that lurking was not a credential. Not the same thing. I wouldn't take your low user number as an automatic credential either, for the reasons you describe. Then again, I haven't heard anyone here say "I've got a low user number so I feel qualified to make my comment." I have, however, heard several people attribute weight to their opinion based on the time they've been lurking here, and that just doesn't track for me.
posted by scarabic at 10:44 PM on December 14, 2004
I think Seth is the ultimate example of the longtime user who hasn't contributed anything much, and everyone knows that, and nobody gives him the time of day. So no, long membership isn't automatic authority either.
posted by scarabic at 10:45 PM on December 14, 2004
posted by scarabic at 10:45 PM on December 14, 2004
if you really believe that establishing your "authority" on a web site or worrying if the members of metafilter will listen to you it might be time to step away from the computer.
huh? I wasn't worried about it. I'm just trying to make a point in regards to this thread.
Presumably, when people do post comments in threads its because they are sharing and want others to read and acknowledge their opinions. I think this is true in real life too.
:)
I'll admit "authority" may have been the wrong word but hopefully you understand what I mean.
posted by vacapinta at 10:51 PM on December 14, 2004
huh? I wasn't worried about it. I'm just trying to make a point in regards to this thread.
Presumably, when people do post comments in threads its because they are sharing and want others to read and acknowledge their opinions. I think this is true in real life too.
:)
I'll admit "authority" may have been the wrong word but hopefully you understand what I mean.
posted by vacapinta at 10:51 PM on December 14, 2004
"I think Seth is the ultimate example of the longtime user..."
Who?
posted by cedar at 11:01 PM on December 14, 2004
Who?
posted by cedar at 11:01 PM on December 14, 2004
Seth, or, for those who care about low-low user numbers: Seth.
posted by scarabic at 1:36 AM on December 15, 2004
posted by scarabic at 1:36 AM on December 15, 2004
your first action in three years is to go try to get someone publicly crucified on MeTa on a technicality
(Notices blood coming from my palms) Praise Jesus!
Say, gang, let's stop beating up on this guy!
Waitaminute. I haven't gotten my punch yet. [SMACK!] There. Better.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 1:47 AM on December 15, 2004
(Notices blood coming from my palms) Praise Jesus!
Say, gang, let's stop beating up on this guy!
Waitaminute. I haven't gotten my punch yet. [SMACK!] There. Better.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 1:47 AM on December 15, 2004
Oh, and one more thing:
This was on NYT and slashdot... Is it worth reposting on mefi?
This was on the NYT on Tuesday morning, ~7 am. My post was up ~4 am. Maybe, just maybe, if you spent your entire life on MeFi like you're supposed to, you'd know that I couldn't possibly have used the NYT as inspiration.
Anyway, of course it was on Slashdot. I said it in my friggin post Dr. Holmes, because I believe one should attribute your sources.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 1:52 AM on December 15, 2004
This was on NYT and slashdot... Is it worth reposting on mefi?
This was on the NYT on Tuesday morning, ~7 am. My post was up ~4 am. Maybe, just maybe, if you spent your entire life on MeFi like you're supposed to, you'd know that I couldn't possibly have used the NYT as inspiration.
Anyway, of course it was on Slashdot. I said it in my friggin post Dr. Holmes, because I believe one should attribute your sources.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 1:52 AM on December 15, 2004
about_time: I guess you probably feel a bit told off now, but I think you're doing pretty well to actually take it to MeTa and then to acknowledge those who've said you're wrong. It's put you ahead of a few people who've had negative reactions to posts here recently.
posted by biffa at 5:58 AM on December 15, 2004
posted by biffa at 5:58 AM on December 15, 2004
you're all wrong
you're all right
you each have an opinion
you're entitled
you're a member
gads, i love metafilter
posted by kamylyon at 6:59 AM on December 15, 2004
you're all right
you each have an opinion
you're entitled
you're a member
gads, i love metafilter
posted by kamylyon at 6:59 AM on December 15, 2004
I said it in my friggin post Dr. Holmes
Point of order: Sherlock Holmes was not a doctor.
And while we're at it, that pointy-eared guy on Star Trek? Also not a doctor.
Oh yeah, and: That street everybody lives on at the beginning of Toni Morrison's Song of Solomon? Also Not Doctor.
posted by soyjoy at 9:26 AM on December 15, 2004
Point of order: Sherlock Holmes was not a doctor.
And while we're at it, that pointy-eared guy on Star Trek? Also not a doctor.
Oh yeah, and: That street everybody lives on at the beginning of Toni Morrison's Song of Solomon? Also Not Doctor.
posted by soyjoy at 9:26 AM on December 15, 2004
You can't train them, they aren't puppies.
I disagree. I think firm, consistent, rewards-based training program rigorously applied now will result in a class of users we can take out in public without free of embarrassing accidents. I nominate biscotti as lead trainer.
Otherwise, we may have to have the worst of them put down.
posted by timeistight at 9:36 AM on December 15, 2004
I disagree. I think firm, consistent, rewards-based training program rigorously applied now will result in a class of users we can take out in public without free of embarrassing accidents. I nominate biscotti as lead trainer.
Otherwise, we may have to have the worst of them put down.
posted by timeistight at 9:36 AM on December 15, 2004
Point of order: Sherlock Holmes was not a doctor.
Shit. I realized this just after posting it and thought nobody would notice. THANKS A LOT, KILLJOY
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:40 AM on December 15, 2004
Shit. I realized this just after posting it and thought nobody would notice. THANKS A LOT, KILLJOY
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:40 AM on December 15, 2004
And another thing! We should all follow Robert's Rules of Order here.
posted by norm at 1:36 PM on December 15, 2004
posted by norm at 1:36 PM on December 15, 2004
Call for the Orders of the Day!
Note that this call requires no second, and is in order when another has the floor, even though it interrupts a speech, as a single member has a right to demand that the order of business be conformed to.
posted by languagehat at 2:12 PM on December 15, 2004
Note that this call requires no second, and is in order when another has the floor, even though it interrupts a speech, as a single member has a right to demand that the order of business be conformed to.
posted by languagehat at 2:12 PM on December 15, 2004
chile. :)
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:16 PM on December 15, 2004
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:16 PM on December 15, 2004
oh yeah, i always get that wrong :c)
*I* know what I mean
posted by kamylyon at 12:22 AM on December 16, 2004
*I* know what I mean
posted by kamylyon at 12:22 AM on December 16, 2004
Are they not homphonous synonyms, chile/chilli/chili?
posted by dash_slot- at 5:53 AM on December 16, 2004
posted by dash_slot- at 5:53 AM on December 16, 2004
Or (probabaly easier to develop) new comments to ask.mefi get the original post pushed to the top again?
posted by dash_slot- at 9:23 AM on December 16, 2004
posted by dash_slot- at 9:23 AM on December 16, 2004
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by SweetJesus at 5:41 PM on December 14, 2004