Is it chatfilter?

January 25, 2005 11:51 AM

ChatFilter redux
posted by DevilsAdvocate to Etiquette/Policy at 11:51 AM (12 comments total)

I think what cactus meant to ask was this: "I'm considering getting into sports; i.e., following a team, going to sporting events, buying jerseys, etc. I can see that there is a significant financial commitment involved, though. If you follow sports, can you describe for me what sports has meant to you, using specific examples from sporting events you've seen, so that I can better judge whether this makes sense for me from a cost/benefit perspective?"

At least, that's how I read it.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 11:58 AM on January 25, 2005

But it has practical value. He may go out and buy a sports team based on user recommendations. :)
posted by vacapinta at 12:14 PM on January 25, 2005

SportsFilter hearts chat!
posted by danOstuporStar at 12:17 PM on January 25, 2005

My apologies if it's too chatty. I actually hardly ever follow professional sports (and have no interest whatsoever in making a financial investment in them), and hadn't even been aware of sportsfilter's existence. I agree the question would have been better placed there.

Practical use? Since I don't follow current sporting events, I'll at least have a few good historical events to discuss with people, as well as a better understanding of what (some aspects) of sports mean to some people.

Pretty weak excuse, but it's the best I could come up with. :)
posted by cactus at 12:52 PM on January 25, 2005

See, that would have been a good question:

"I don't follow sports. What's a good sports anecdote to use in appropriate conversations?"
posted by smackfu at 12:57 PM on January 25, 2005

Gotcha. Thanks, smackfu.
posted by cactus at 1:06 PM on January 25, 2005

I'm considering taking up smoking. My doctor says I'm not getting enough tar.

(Apologies: Steve Martin)
posted by petebest at 1:25 PM on January 25, 2005

All the "your post should have been worded like..." complaints are bollocks. The kvetching about violations of your perceived rules for AskMe is annoying.

AskMe now has two moderators. Questions phrased in the abstract are a recognised grey area. If #1 and/or #2 thinks it devalues AskMe (or wastes bandwidth), it will get deleted. It is a decent thread, I hope they let it stay.
posted by McGuillicuddy at 1:40 PM on January 25, 2005

At least, that's how I read it.

You just made all that up.

The post was pure, unadulterated chatfilter. If there's to be any consistency in AskMe, it should go.
posted by rushmc at 2:32 PM on January 25, 2005

You just made all that up.

Yes, but that positioning of the question would have elicited the exact same set of answers, with zero chatfilter complaints. So is it the form of the question that offends you, or the resulting thread?
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 2:39 PM on January 25, 2005

Yes, but that positioning of the question would have elicited the exact same set of answers,

I beg to differ. "Being a sports fan may not be as expensive as you think..."
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 3:05 PM on January 25, 2005

While we're at it: What's the difference between asking for new poetry and asking for tsunami jokes? ;-P
posted by mischief at 1:56 PM on January 27, 2005