MetaChat REGISTER   ||   LOGIN   ||   IMAGES ARE OFF   ||   RECENT COMMENTS




artphoto by splunge
artphoto by TheophileEscargot
artphoto by Kronos_to_Earth
artphoto by ethylene

Home

About

Search

Archives

Mecha Wiki

Metachat Eye

Emcee

IRC Channels

IRC FAQ


 RSS


Comment Feed:

RSS

10 October 2005

Bets are on: How big will this thread get? I'm calling 180 posts.
I'm going to take a chance with my money and say "closed after 20 posts or less."
posted by selfnoise 10 October | 09:24
I find the grammar and spelling problems in that post irritating. /pedant
posted by killdevil 10 October | 09:29
just imagine combining a y2karl mefi post with a bisexual askme relationships question ("should i sleep with my husband's sister while helping out at abu ghraib?"). ah, what majesty that could achieve...
posted by andrew cooke 10 October | 10:07
...ideally to be posted in the MeTa, in the form of "I'm not sure if I should post this - what do you all think?"
posted by Wolfdog 10 October | 10:12
At least 10.
posted by seanyboy 10 October | 10:14
that whole place is a damn mess
posted by puke & cry 10 October | 10:29
closed at 104 with a comment from matt saying something like "thats enough of that!" for the win.
posted by Quartermass 10 October | 10:30
I hope he uses "Alriiiighty then"
posted by urbanwhaleshark 10 October | 10:32
If it makes it to 180 comments, wheelieman will post 40 of them, if he keeps up his current pace.
posted by goatdog 10 October | 10:37
Put me down for three shares on over 200. It's been days and days since there was any pissing contests in the grey.
posted by loquacious 10 October | 10:45
They'll never beat 9622.
posted by gnfti 10 October | 10:47
I'm surprised that no one's jumped on the falty punctuation. Surprisingly polite, so far.

*pulls up a chair*
posted by puddinghead 10 October | 10:57
/points out incorrect spelling of faulty within last sentence and smugly tugs chair from puddinghead's butt.
posted by longbaugh 10 October | 12:08
.ideally to be posted in the MeTa, in the form of "I'm not sure if I should post this - what do you all think?"

that, and add big formatting problems, like too much space in the front page and small tags. and embedded .wmv, too
posted by matteo 10 October | 12:20
What's the bet that Alex will put in an appearance? He's been quiet these past few days and MeTa is not the same without everyone jumping onto the pointless drama-wagon and berating him because "well, gee it's just fun to pick on people".
posted by longbaugh 10 October | 12:30
Maybe it'll be closer to 51 comments.
posted by seanyboy 10 October | 12:35
Hah (*laughs from awkward position on floor*)!!! I missed that. I suck.
posted by puddinghead 10 October | 12:53
Meanwhile, I am safe and warm here.

As are we all. Ahhhh.....
posted by bunnyfire 10 October | 12:58
matteo has best comment so far:

but this is a site that started when a guy posted about cats being scanned
posted by quonsar 10 October | 13:02
Meanwhile, I am safe and warm here.
Yes, as long as you find the right clique you'll always be safe and warm.
posted by Wolfdog 10 October | 13:05
and bugbread throws in a dash of hot nigger cum and a smattering of dead jew. positively delightful! i am tempted to register a sockpuppet just for that thread. what do you think of "NiggerShitting_KikeFucker"?
posted by quonsar 10 October | 13:10
Okay, I've baleeted my bookmark to MeFi and replaced it with MeCha. I already feel better, I actually recognize names here.
posted by sciurus 10 October | 13:21
*nods*
posted by quonsar 10 October | 13:24
Meanwhile, I am safe and warm here.
Yes, as long as you find the right clique you'll always be safe and warm.


Was that supposed to be mean?

I bet you like cilantro too.
posted by bunnyfire 10 October | 13:43
and bugbread throws in a dash of hot nigger cum and a smattering of dead jew. positively delightful!

Always happy to be of service.

Good thing I found this thread, too; I was wondering what Konolia and Seanyboy's post inflatatrons were there for.

closed at 104 with a comment from matt saying something like "thats enough of that!" for the win.

Personally, I guess 105, with matt's comment being #104, and then some random person who hit their "post comment" button in the split second between Matt hitting "post comment" and Matt hitting "Close Thread" being #105.
posted by bugbread 10 October | 13:58
They deleted our numbers over there but not the snark directed at me...which makes the snark look particularly ridiculous. Which amuses me.
posted by bunnyfire 10 October | 14:34
every time they delete something they look foolish. they never learn. meanwhile, the Bush sockpuppet's "Harriet Miers Radio Speech" takes the lead in hilarity.
posted by quonsar 10 October | 14:39
How long before solid-one-love challenges someone to a duel at dawn?
posted by goatdog 10 October | 14:49
Nigger.

Sweet: MeCha hits a new low.
posted by Frisbee Girl 10 October | 14:49
AlexRothko has appeared.
posted by bugbread 10 October | 14:51
but...but... Fris! it was HOT NIGGER CUM! who could resist?
posted by quonsar 10 October | 14:51
THUNDERDOME FOR NERRRRRRDDS!!!
posted by dodgygeezer 10 October | 14:53
every time they delete something they look foolish.

You have a pretty low threshold for lookin' foolish. Deleting "6, 7, 8" and "50, 51, 52" don't make them look super-foolish to me. 'Course, I wear contacts, so my vision tain't so great.

BTW, how do you properly spell tain't? 'tain't? t'ain't? 't'ain't?
posted by bugbread 10 October | 14:54
go back and read bunnyfire's comment. you missed an integral part of the context of my remark. probably the bugs in your bread.
posted by quonsar 10 October | 14:56
they deleted the "Don't be a dick, Alex" comment, and it just got reposted. this is fun.
posted by quonsar 10 October | 15:00
I read it, I just kinda agreed with bunnyfire: it made the snark look foolish. Didn't particularly make Matt or Jessamyn look foolish (to me, that is). I'm not gonna argue that it did or didn't in some absolute sense, cause, hey, looking foolish is a subjective thing, and I don't think you're wrong. We just disagree, like you might have a hankerin' fer licorice and I might be thinkin' licorice tastes like frogbutt. Just a difference of opinion.

('cept that the looking foolish case is truly subjective, whereas I have objective proof that licorice tastes like frogbutt)
posted by bugbread 10 October | 15:01
i lurvs me some frogbutt!
posted by quonsar 10 October | 15:02
Dude, if there are bugs in your bread, you must bribe Judge Dredd. Or something.
posted by selfnoise 10 October | 15:02
I don't know, q, it's not that hard for me, but perhaps having had my social and professional skills summed up this way: "Niggerbitch, they only like you because you got tits" on a near daily basis by a co-worker for the last few months has put a tad bit of a negative spin on what I find a ridiculously cheap and unoriginal epithet.
posted by Frisbee Girl 10 October | 15:02
Halfway there, whoa-ohhhhhhhhhh
posted by Wolfdog 10 October | 15:02
Bets are on: how big will this thread get? I'm calling 100 posts.
posted by goatdog 10 October | 15:04
having had my social and professional skills summed up this way: "Niggerbitch, they only like you because you got tits" on a near daily basis by a co-worker for the last few months has put a tad bit of a negative spin on what I find a ridiculously cheap and unoriginal epithet.

Whoa, you mean "nigger" didn't have a negative spin before that?!
posted by bugbread 10 October | 15:08
you got tits? let's see!

but seriously, show me the way to this cow-orker so that i can ork 'em one right between the eyes.
posted by quonsar 10 October | 15:12
frogbutt tastes like cilantro.
posted by bunnyfire 10 October | 15:14
isn't cilantro that 4 hour erection pill i see all the ads for on tv?
posted by quonsar 10 October | 15:16
I can't even type that word (yeah, I know, it's just a word, but it's a loaded word, a HATE word). I can't rise above it, Frisbee Girl- put me on the list for the beating. What an asshole.
posted by puddinghead 10 October | 15:18
I tasted frogbutt once, but only because someone told me it was hallucinogenic.

I saw froggy goatse fractals for hours.
posted by dodgygeezer 10 October | 15:19
I can proudly state with confidence that I had nothing whatsoever to do what that thread. ;-P
posted by mischief 10 October | 15:23
No, bugbread, it's always had a great deal of negativity attached to it. I was being a little facetious there. (At the very least, if you're going to try to insult me, put some creativity into it instead of lamely rephrasing the clear facts that I am a female of African American heritage.)

In general, I hate the word and I'm always surprised when people who otherwise appear to be articulate and intelligent toss it around.
posted by Frisbee Girl 10 October | 15:24
If your bread has bugs, invest in decorative mugs.
posted by selfnoise 10 October | 15:27
I lurvs me some Frisbee Girl. Fuck that word anyway.
posted by quonsar 10 October | 15:32
In general, I hate the word and I'm always surprised when people who otherwise appear to be articulate and intelligent toss it around.

Sorry if it didn't come across the way I meant it to: y2k was saying that a single sentence shouldn't cause a hubbub because it was a single sentence, so I was providing an example of a single problemsome sentence. The example would only work if the sentence was actually problemsome (i.e. if I said "You're a poopybutt", it wouldn't work, because y2k would say "See, what a lame thing it is to be bothered by a sentence"), so I picked something that, if someone typed it as a non-example, would get me all riled up and pissed off.

So, if it makes you feel better (maybe it will, and maybe it won't), I typed that sentence specifically because it's the kind of sentence that would get me all upset, so if it gets you all upset, we're pretty much on the same wavelength.
posted by bugbread 10 October | 15:41
Alex is all upset at George W. Bush, who he is convinced is me. What a dick!
posted by quonsar 10 October | 16:02
I got called a "nigga" at a highschool I subbed at the other day. That's never happened before.
posted by nickdanger 10 October | 16:17
Metachat: Metametatalk.

170 posts and climbing.
posted by killdevil 10 October | 16:18
And now the dios and Alex double-act (the only known double-act with two straight men) is back together, it can only get bigger.
posted by dodgygeezer 10 October | 16:21
Bugbread, I get you and though no apology was needed or requested, it's accepted. Anyway, I'm not offended so much as disappointed and moreso with the world at large. It's been such a long few months dealing with this clown on a daily basis and it's such a crap word. But not everyone can come up with such classics as skull fucking nouns and selling verbs to the Yangban.

A gal can hope, though. ;)

And thanks to everyone for the love. The problem with people such as this guy is that hate and anger feed hate and anger. In order to bring that cycle to an end, someone has to not return the punch, regardless of how maddening/exasperating/frustrating/hurtful. As a bully personality and one who thrives on attention, once he figured out what bothered me, he pushed those buttons as often as possible and today my tongue is measuably shorter. Small price, though, so says I.

However, I did let my Vicious Little Bitch out to play for his final five minutes at work: In front the entire staff (all of whom know how much I dislike him and how much he tormented me), he said to me, "You know you're going to miss me when I'm gone." Without looking at him, I replied, "Honey, as far as I'm concerned, you never even showed up."

I'm going to hell. But it's worth it.

On preview: nickdanger, that sucks.
posted by Frisbee Girl 10 October | 16:29
sounds like you work in a very docile and repressed place. where i come from, he'd have been slapped with a civil rights complaint, with some sexual harassment and hate speech overtones thrown in for good measure.
posted by quonsar 10 October | 16:35
and meanwhile over on metatalk... the document contains no data.
posted by quonsar 10 October | 16:36
q, there's a reason he no longer works there. That said, the social dynamics of the hospitality industry can be somewhat more fluid that those of other corporate cultures. Occupational hazard and such.
posted by Frisbee Girl 10 October | 16:54
200 comments.
posted by quonsar 10 October | 17:21
Oh, well, great, I just went and lost it. Been a while since that happened.
posted by bugbread 10 October | 17:24
i'm beginning to think Alex is the biggest dick EVAR.
posted by quonsar 10 October | 17:26
*hugs bugbread*
posted by bunnyfire 10 October | 17:31
Without looking at him, I replied, "Honey, as far as I'm concerned, you never even showed up."

Yeah! Raaah! Grrr!

And in regards to the MeTa thread: typical. Just sadly typical. And I wish Alex would just get banned permanently.
posted by Specklet 10 October | 17:36
okay, who had 216?
posted by jessamyn 10 October | 17:41
lol!
posted by quonsar 10 October | 17:42
HA!! Hi, jessamyn!

Give us a hug, bugbread. That really wasn't so bad.
posted by Frisbee Girl 10 October | 17:42
Give us a hug, bugbread. That really wasn't so bad.

Hugs to bunnyfire and Frisbee Girl. And it wasn't so bad because apparently matt disabled the "big" tag ^_^
posted by bugbread 10 October | 17:48
I don't get it. When everyone was calling each other "dick" and then complaining about getting called by their real name... Are the all named "Dick?"
posted by leftcoastbob 10 October | 17:50
I'm starting to suspect that Rothko has something out for me personally.
posted by bugbread 10 October | 17:51
NO. THEY'RE NAMED ALEX.
posted by quonsar 10 October | 17:51
Ah, it's over. I really wish people would leave Alex/Rothko alone.
posted by dame 10 October | 17:53
And I think it's the first time I've been called disgusting and dishonest for asking for some information so that I could agree with someone.

Besides which, everyone knows that all the posters on Mefi besides Jessamyn and myself are actually matt's sock puppets, drumming up traffic so that he can float his IPO for a billion dollars. You can all drop the charade.
posted by bugbread 10 October | 17:54
Rothko. i wonder if that's Roscoe, with a lisp?
posted by quonsar 10 October | 17:58
Sorry, multiple posts due to cooling-down period.

Anyway, I was thinking "Man, if I'd read my 'all. single. word. sentences.' as another person, I'd be thinking 'Uh-oh, bugbread's gonna flame out'" Which I wasn't, but it was kinda scary realizing I was starting to emulate flameout behavior.

Next thing you know I'd be saying stuff like "A real man would say, 'Take a knife, quonsar, and face Minya to the death.' If they would not say that, they could at least say, 'We'll shock both of you with electiricity until quonsar admits his lies.' I would accept either decision."
posted by bugbread 10 October | 18:00
q, can you please stop being a dick?
posted by dame 10 October | 18:02
No real names, dame! Even if they're someone else's.
posted by leftcoastbob 10 October | 18:05
Ah, it's over. I really wish people would leave Alex/Rothko alone.

Me too. Go pick on dhoyt or dios or something.
posted by amberglow 10 October | 18:09
Come to think of it, Mefi doesn't really have a "widely beloved": a person who is just such a cool, groovy person that it would be silly to imagine someone picking on them. Kinda unusual, that. (There's always one universally likeable and liked person on every forum I've ever been on. Usually someone really humble, and a bit older than the average poster age.)
posted by bugbread 10 October | 18:18
jessamyn fills that niche, don't you think?
posted by mygothlaundry 10 October | 18:24
That was fun reading! Let's start another...
posted by mischief 10 October | 18:27
That was fun reading! Let's start another...
posted by mischief 10 October | 18:29
jessamyn fills that niche, don't you think?

Maybe now. When she became a joint admin, though, that wasn't the case, so I wouldn't be surprised to see some folks who are against editing/deleting harshing on her.

(From other thread, moved over here)
Or to put it another way, bugbread--is there global warming or do you need more data before you make up your mind ?

I'm sure enough that there is that I'd argue with someone who knew little about the issue, but unsure enough that if I was talking with a scientist (armchair or amateur) who said there wasn't, I probably wouldn't disagree with them about it. Basically, my mind is made up, but in a pretty soft and malleable way, unlike, for example, how hard my mind is made up that the world is basically spherical.

For chrissake, you had two people in the same place saying the same thing. How much evidence do you need before you come to a conclusion to which you so obviously do not wish to reach ?

Sorry, I'm not following (and this is not intentional obtuseness, this is plain old not following): who was telling me the same thing, and what conclusion was I not wanting to reach?

I will say that, while I was prepared to accept any data from Alex supporting his position, and any data from non-Alex supporting his position, I wasn't willing to turn an ear to people arguing "it doesn't happen" from non-Alex, because there's so much Alex hate on Mefi that he gets disagreed with even when he's right, and a non-provable like "it doesn't happen" in opposition to Alex is too liable to be tainted info to be of any use. (Of course, if someone did a statistical analysis and provided numbers, I'd believe them, but that's pretty much insane and impossible).

So, basically, if Alex or anyone else provided a few more names, I'd have agreed with him, and if neither he nor anyone else were able to provide any more names, I'd disagree with him. I just don't remember enough of the nuances and discussions at Mefi to decide whether calling people by name was common or not, and since he said it was common, I figured he could provide some examples.
posted by bugbread 10 October | 18:31
Aaaaand back here...

Bugbread, resonse to you in this thread. I describe you from my viewpoint and you automatically deny my viewpoint.

In this case, for a very good reason: you say I'm being willfully obtuse over in that MeTa thread, but if it's wilful, I'd be the one to know. I wasn't being wilfully obtuse. I can't really not automatically deny your viewpoint, because...well, you're wrong. If you'd said I appeared wilfully obtuse, then I guess you could be right, and I wouldn't disagree, but you state as fact something that I'm in a unique position to be able to determine categorically isn't fact, so I said so.

What people find frustrating is a nit picking, hair splitting refusal to see things from their side at all.

Understood. And I've tried to reign in the hair-splitting after having a particular hair-splitting day about a month ago. I knew that I was splitting hairs when I did it. Now, as far as I know, I'm not splitting hairs. Some people just make completely untrue statements, and I call them on it. And, no, this isn't in reference to Alex or today's thread, because I don't think he was making an untrue statement, and I wasn't calling anyone on anything.

If you can't make explicit sense of people's postion, why expect they make sense of yours?

That's very true, and something I've got to work at. Maybe that's why I'm so verbose: I have a hard time figuring out what some people are thinking and why they think it, so I try to make myself really clear. (Actually, the latter more than the former: I can tell people's opinions, but nobody states their reasons, so it comes down to agreeing with people you already agree with, and disagreeing with people you already disagree with, with no other info to perhaps change your mind or make you think of it another way.)

Again, though, I don't see how this links to the thread today, because there I was just trying to ask a simple, unloaded, info-seeking question. I had no view to make clear, and I understood Rothko's view perfectly well.
posted by bugbread 10 October | 19:13
I find rothko very irritating but you were talking down to him by my lights. Splitting hairs is talking down or at least can be easily misconstrued as such. Describing yourself in self-flattering terms is talking down. You refuse to see things from the perspective of the other person and demand tedious clarification before you can see the other person's side. It seems like conversation is a contest for you.

rothko can be obtuse but you more than matched him. You seemed to invalidate everything he said. I found the first naming a bit creepy--we lost realcountrymusic over this and I find that a real loss. Plus I think it is rude. Especially when done by a person of unknown name. Do you think it permissible to walk to people in real life and address them by their first name ? I don't.

Neither do I think it productive to dispute everything they say and pose oh so clever to me only rhetorical questions. Life is too short. Would you rather speak or be heard ? Demonstrating how clever you are is speaking to speak, not be heard.In my opinion, you don't listen--you debate and dispute. You can just as easily maintain your counsel and convey some understanding of the other person's viewpoint by placing yourself in their viewpoint. You demand to be convinced. The effort must come from them. Try making an effort to understand using your imagination rather than cross-examining and nit-picking.

It seems to be OK to taunt people you don't like by using their first name or making oblique cracks about their sexuality if the person is not liked. The tacit assumption is that they had it coming. So, you demanded one of the most disliked individuals on the site to prove to your satisfaction that this was done to him.You badgered him with your nit-picking. Look, dhoyt addressed me by first name in that very thread. He addressed lupus_yonderboy by first name in the thread linked. He has addressed me by first name before and I remember a long deleted thread where he and Steve_At_Linnwood kept calling Fold_&_Mutilate by his first name. Do you need links ? I can provide them. Will you need to examine everything then linked really closely and take a real long time doing it before you reach your eminently wiser assessment ? Do you tend to make people wait for you in real life but are in a real hurry if they want to dawdle ? That's what I am wondering. Your conversations are far more about you than you think. This hairsplitting dawdling on details says that. That is my perception.
posted by y2karl 10 October | 19:15
Shorter y2karl to bugbread: you talk down to people. It's not about listening, it's about scoring points. It's tedious and irritating.
posted by y2karl 10 October | 19:19
Bugbread, you were hammering on the same damn question that you knew wasn't going to get answered. In addition, it concerned someone who is known to not be able to shut up when it would suit him best. So saying "I just wanted my plain question answered" is a little disingenuous.

(I don't think you were baiting Rothko the way some people do, but you certainly weren't helping.)
posted by dame 10 October | 19:24
Splitting hairs is talking down or at least can be easily misconstrued as such.


I guess the problem is that I don't understand what hair I was splitting. He said something that I'd never really thought about before (people calling eachother by real names a lot). I didn't know if it was true or not, so I asked for some examples. Lord knows I've done stuff that I consider splitting hairs, and I've done stuff that I don't consider splitting hairs but I can understand other people seeing as splitting hairs. It's just that, in this case, I was just asking a plain ole curiosity question, and being called disgusting and dishonest for it. What hair was I splitting? What did I do wrong for asking an example of something somebody mentioned and that I hadn't thought of?

You refuse to see things from the perspective of the other person and demand tedious clarification before you can see the other person's side.

I can guess where the problem is here: In today's case, for example, I understood Rothko's perspective, and I was just trying to get enough information to decide whether I agreed or not. It wasn't that I couldn't see his side: I could, and he might have been wrong, and he might have been right, and I just wanted to know a little more so that I could determine what I thought about it. My calls for additional info aren't always about trying to understand a position, they're about trying to understand the rationale behind a position, and trying to determine how I feel about the position.

Which brings me back to something I mentioned in that thread, and I feel again here: If I agreed with Rothko, some people would see me as a jerk. And if I disagreed with him, some people would see me as a jerk. But since I tried to get enough info to determine whether I agreed or disagreed, people see me as a big jerk.

I don't know if it's true or not, or if it's just me, but it really does seem sometimes that the people who don't have strong opinions get shit for not feeling strongly enough.

Neither do I think it productive to dispute everything they say and pose oh so clever to me only rhetorical questions.


Neither do I. It wasn't a rhetorical question!! What on earth can I do to convince y'all of that?! It was a real, unclever, unrhetorical, unbackhanded, unsemantic plain old question!

Would you rather speak or be heard ?
Neither. I'd rather exchange information, change minds, get my mind changed, and generally get down to the roots of matters.

So, you demanded one of the most disliked individuals on the site to prove to your satisfaction that this was done to him.
Huh? No, I didn't. Alex said it happened all the time. I don't know if it happens a lot or it happens a little, so I asked him for some examples, and he jumped down my throat about it. Every time I tried to explain that it was a serious, straightforward question, he got more insulting, so I got more frustrated, and it ended with me being called disgusting for asking a curiosity question.

Look, dhoyt addressed me by first name in that very thread. He addressed lupus_yonderboy by first name in the thread linked. He has addressed me by first name before and I remember a long deleted thread where he and Steve_At_Linnwood kept calling Fold_&_Mutilate by his first name. Do you need links ? I can provide them. Will you need to examine everything then linked really closely and take a real long time doing it before you reach your eminently wiser assessment ? Do you tend to make people wait for you in real life but are in a real hurry if they want to dawdle ?


Dude, no! Holy fuck, why didn't you say that in the thread? You (yeah, people called you karl, but I didn't realize that was really your name), Steve (I shoulda guessed about that), Fold_and_Mutilate, rothko, jonmc, EB...That's a lotta people. That's all I was looking for. Man, why did it take this much anguish just to get that answer?? That's all I was looking for.
posted by bugbread 10 October | 19:40
Bugbread, you were hammering on the same damn question that you knew wasn't going to get answered.

For what it's worth, I think Alex is not a dumb guy, and I really did think that at some point he might realize that it was just a question, and he (or someone else) might answer it. I guess that shows an error in my judgement, but it was an error of overestimating someone.

But I got my answer here (from y2karl), and I guess I agree with Alex's initial statement. Sure took a lot of blood, sweat, and tears to reach that conclusion, though.
posted by bugbread 10 October | 19:52
Sure took a lot of blood, sweat, and tears to reach that conclusion, though.


And that had nothing to do with the way you went after it. It was just because everyone else is so crazy and you are even and deliberate. That you exasperated it out of y2karl notwithstanding, it wasn't going to get answered by Rothko. But you kept hammering at him, even when it was clear he had moved into flip-out land and nothing good was going to come of it.

To reiterate, I really wish people would leave the boy alone.
posted by dame 10 October | 19:59
But you kept hammering at him, even when it was clear he had moved into flip-out land and nothing good was going to come of it.

You're right, of course. To put myself momentarily into total asshole mode: I'm the doctor who keeps pumping the patient's chest, shouting "Breathe, dammit!!". I somehow believe, unless the person is bevets or the like, that they'll eventually come around. I need to learn to let go.

/delusions-of-grandeur-mode
posted by bugbread 10 October | 20:02
Well, I was pointing this all out when Jessamyn closed the thread. I really didn't want to get into it with dhoyt initially but the first naming eventually reminded me of how he just hammered rothko with the Alex Reynolds crap in thread after thread. Then I remembered some other things he said of late--the drama queen crack directed at digaman. Taunting is taunting. And after that whole shitty thread that went on before between those two, that drama queen crack made towards digaman was an especially creepy dig. I've crossed dhoyt before and didn't want to get on his case but there it was--a thread in the gray and a topic related, so I spoke up.

rothko rubs people the wrong way for this reason or that. But he should be treated as civilly as the next person. I don't buy this 'Well, he deserves it because he's a jerk.' That gives permission to bring out the worst in people.
posted by y2karl 10 October | 20:16
I don't buy this 'Well, he deserves it because he's a jerk.'


Neither do I. I've treated him badly in the past (the one that sticks out is the drama queen thread, where I vacillated badly between trying to be fair and giving in to my dark side), but I've looked over my disagreements with him since then, and it seems to come down to:

- He makes an extreme statement about a position he believes. But not so extreme as to be self-evidently unworthy of response (Very little "All Christians are murderers and thieves", but a lot of "Most Christians are hypocrites" type stuff...Though he's probably never said that particular position, it's just the first example of the statement type that pops to mind).
- I understand his position, and may agree or disagree, but his statement is just over the threshold for "call his bluff" but under the threshold of "he's trolling".
- I try to point out that the statement is inaccurate.
- He says I'm arguing semantics.

It seems like the rule of thumb for him is that what he says is true, and any disagreement is people assailing his correct position with semantic arguments. And from my position, it seems that what he says is sometimes true and sometimes false, and when the false ones are pointed out, they're dismissed as semantics.

And after enough of that, apparently, you get on the shitlist, at which point even straight questions are treated as attacks as they are coming from an "enemy".
posted by bugbread 10 October | 20:26
All my comments were deleted. DAMN
posted by seanyboy 10 October | 20:36
Without looking at him, I replied, "Honey, as far as I'm concerned, you never even showed up."

Awesome, Fris!
posted by deborah 10 October | 20:49
Oh, and solid-one-love: this person is the only one at MeFi that has me considering the user-block thingie (can't think of the right term). I just wish s/he'd go the fuck away.
posted by deborah 10 October | 20:53
i wish that thread had not closed. i could smell blood.
posted by weretable and the undead chairs 10 October | 20:59
Let's not speak of hare splitting here. It makes me nervous.
posted by bunnyfire 10 October | 20:59
I'm the doctor who keeps pumping the patient's chest, shouting "Breathe, dammit!!".


Please. You were doing that for no ones benefit but your own. And no sort of sarcastic disavowal makes that idea any better.
posted by dame 10 October | 21:01
All my comments were deleted. DAMN

i know! and they were truly best of thread!
posted by quonsar 10 October | 21:53
Please. You were doing that for no ones benefit but your own. And no sort of sarcastic disavowal makes that idea any better.

Yeah, sorry, that's how I meant it. In those scenes (in movies), it's almost never for the patient, but the doctor's pride and unwillingness to lose a patient.
posted by bugbread 10 October | 23:00
Er, ok, let me modify that. In some scenes in movies, it's for the patient, and in some, it's for the doctors pride and stubborness. I was thinking of the latter when I wrote it.
posted by bugbread 10 October | 23:01
Fair enough, bugbread. I definitely don't have the movie idea in my head. But crankiness aside, I think your insistence really added to the final implosion, and that's unfortunate.
posted by dame 11 October | 00:40
What happened? What'd I miss? Did I win the pool?
posted by loquacious 11 October | 00:57
To reiterate, I really wish people would leave the boy alone.

yup, again. I wish a lot of people would refrain from engaging, including me. I'm glad i stayed out of both the orig. mefi thread and that callout.

But really--stop with rothko. enough already.

And if we really lost realcountry over shit, that sucks.
posted by amberglow 11 October | 01:22
Well, gee - this thread has been nearly as "rash-with-flu-symptoms"-like as metatalk. But bunnyfire and the Fris really made me laugh, so there's that.

First rule of mecha: "No hare splitting!"
posted by taz 11 October | 01:41

The default mode is to make oneself right by making the other person wrong. From the gitgo. First and foremost. Nitpicking is a common expression of the default mode. It's dealing from a stacked deck--a way of defining the conversation to flatter oneself, to always be in the position of passive aggressively talking down to the other. People react negatively to it because it because it's an automatic way of giving oneself the leg up in an exchange. Let us define the terms... No, I am not satisfied with that answer.... and so on and so on.
posted by y2karl 11 October | 13:06
Unhealthy obsession, acknowledge thyself.


Ah, it's over. I really wish people would leave Alex/Rothko alone.

Me too. Go pick on dhoyt or dios or something.
posted by amberglow 10 October | 18:09



"Don't pick on X -- pick on Y!" Great sentiment. Well put.
posted by dhoyt 11 October | 13:40
Pick on me - I could do with the infamy.
posted by dodgygeezer 11 October | 13:44
You are antiquated with regard to age, and your character is of dubious stability or trustworthiness!!
posted by dhoyt 11 October | 13:50
Sir you are, with all respect, a blithering jacininny of the first water.
posted by dodgygeezer 11 October | 13:55
I agree with you for the most part about that, y2karl, except for the "Let us define the terms". I've found that a lot (a whole lot) of disagreements come down to people using the same terms with different meanings and not realizing that they're doing so. I've also found that, when going over the meanings of the terms, I often find that, while I may disagree with the definition of the term they've used, that starting with that meaning, the rest of their argument makes sense, and that we're actually in agreement overall, and it's only a terminology difference that makes it seem that we disagree.

It sucks that it comes across as a way to give myself as a leg up, because I'm usually trying to use it as a way to avoid unnecessary conflict. Not that I'm a big conflict avoider in general, but if you see me saying "let's define the terms", you're seeing me entering conflict avoidance mode.
posted by bugbread 11 October | 14:02
When I see Rothko, for some reason I think of Rocko's Modern Life. That was a shitty cartoon.
posted by weretable and the undead chairs 11 October | 14:34
I quite liked Rocko's Modern Life. Rothko's Modern Life - meh, not so much.

I'd always assumed Rothko came from the Chris Morris sketch on Blue Jam. Not that it couldn't be after the artist but it was just a feeling I got from his musical interests.
posted by dodgygeezer 11 October | 14:40
It sucks that it comes across as a way to give myself as a leg up, because I'm usually trying to use it as a way to avoid unnecessary conflict.


This statement may not be automatically and totally invalid and therefore is provisionally acceptable in my opinion.

I often wish there were an emoticon for the expression on Dwight D. Eisenhower's face upon hearing about Truman firing Douglas McArthur. That one I could use.

posted by y2karl 11 October | 14:55
Quonsar, just wanted to let people know that you're a loser who apparently goes after people by email:

≡ Click to see image ≡

So do yourself a big favor and shut your fucking mouth about how I'm somehow a dick.
posted by AlexReynolds 11 October | 15:14
I heart dodgygeezer for saying froggy goatse fractals. Bless you.
posted by dabitch 11 October | 15:32
Posting emails makes you a hippocritimus.
posted by weretable and the undead chairs 11 October | 15:33
Weretable, you've admitted to being as much a hypocrite as the rest of the bullies in that thread. If quonsar wants to be a tough guy then he can defend his own behavior. Go find someone else to pick at. Thank you.
posted by AlexReynolds 11 October | 15:37
I have no desire to defend quonsar, I just do not want you bringing your obsessive, insane shit here.
posted by weretable and the undead chairs 11 October | 15:42
Leave Alex alone, guys! He's done nothing to deserve ridicule.
posted by dhoyt 11 October | 15:42
actually, dhoyt, i'll leave him alone on mecha from here on out since others started it here and there is no reason for me to encourage him to flame out here as well. bad weretable.
posted by weretable and the undead chairs 11 October | 15:47
I often wish there were an emoticon for the expression on Dwight D. Eisenhower's face upon hearing about Truman firing Douglas McArthur. That one I could use.

What, you mean you've never seen this emoticon? All the cool kids are using it:
≡ Click to see image ≡
posted by bugbread 11 October | 15:50
Turning and turning
in the narrowing gyre,
the turd can not hear
the dingleberry...


Boy, the treat the worst the same as the best ideal is certainly getting a road test today.



Upon review: now can you reduce that to three keystrokes ?
posted by y2karl 11 October | 15:57
Upon review: now can you reduce that to three keystrokes ?

Yeah, but only if you have unicode fonts installed.
posted by bugbread 11 October | 15:59
there is no reason for me to encourage him to flame out here as well.

omg homophobe!!
posted by dhoyt 11 October | 16:06
*takes shirt off*

Now, who wanna fuck with Hollywood Cole?


Everybody out, go take a nap.
posted by Divine_Wino 11 October | 16:46
Dear Mecha. Is it wrong of me to really enjoy these thrashthreads for exchanges like these:

Why is it that the phrase "jumping the shark" keeps coming up in my mind as I read this thread?
posted by clevershark

I am NOT going to "jump" you.
posted by weretable and the undead chairs

how do you jump an undead chair?
posted by matteo

[backs away slowly].
posted by clevershark

Oh and my bet was on this here thread becoming 180 posts at one point. C'mon guys, put some elbow grease into it! 129!
posted by dabitch 12 October | 06:21
As far as jumping an undead chair goes, matteo... just flip one upside down and you have four options. hee hee.
posted by weretable and the undead chairs 13 October | 23:29
Underground mutton || Bored at work? A new game to play...

HOME  ||   REGISTER  ||   LOGIN