11/21/24
January 06, 2004
um, why did this get cut?
posted by forksclovetofu to editorial policy at 01:10 PM - 22 comments
Must have been my USC! comment.
posted by billsaysthis at 01:28 PM on January 06, 2004
it might be useful to link to the deleted thread. The link seems interesting but the thread presentation downright sucked (sorry). I skipped it when I saw the post since the obliqueness gave me no idea (other than category, I suppose) what it was about and I couldn't be bothered click on it. Is that grounds for deletion though?
posted by gspm at 01:46 PM on January 06, 2004
I think it might have been deleted just because of what the FPP implied: It's a dead horse. Other dead horses we should consider leaving alone:
- Pete Rose and his (potential) reinstatement - let's just not post about it until he appears on the HOF ballot (or baseball says "Never!" once and for all).
- Yankees and their ZILLION dollar payroll and how it "ruins" baseball - I'm pretty sure nothing more can be added to the discussion.
- The viability of women sports and female athletes - This one is probably the most explosive of the bunch, but I don't see anyone on either side adding anything interesting to the debate any more.
- Soccer in North America - it's not working, it is working, it stinks, it rules, blah blah blah
posted by grum@work at 02:12 PM on January 06, 2004
ooh what/who else can we put in moratorium?
posted by jerseygirl at 02:42 PM on January 06, 2004
I always wanted to visit a moratorium. That's where they keep dead strippers, right? /still wondering why the link got cut...
posted by forksclovetofu at 03:20 PM on January 06, 2004
I deleted it this morning for two reasons:
- SportsFilter is for links that people find of interest. You called it a "dead horse."
- There's nothing descriptive in your post that tells people what it's about.
posted by rcade at 03:30 PM on January 06, 2004
So, my coy style is moving into the realm of "vague" or "cryptic" or "stupid"? Will bear this in mind for future FPP's. Kinda liked the idea of unwrapping the present, but seems that's just me. And the Rose story was intended as a gag... "a Rose by any other name" was the headline, so I made an effort not to USE the name... get it? get it? See, this is what a liberal arts education does to you... The dead horse thing was also bit of a joke; but it did seem that with the bowl games finally over, now was an opportune time to take one last look at the VERY confusing system that college football has been saddled with (pun intended). Still, I'm WELL aware that this is a topic that's been talked to death; hence the description. In any case, I'll keep experimenting here until I get a girlfriend and then I'll calm down a little. You don't have a sister, do ya rcade?
posted by forksclovetofu at 03:40 PM on January 06, 2004
You can be cryptic or clever in the link title, be a bit more descriptive in the link desciption. :) SpoFi: Experimenting Here Until They Get Girlfriends.
posted by jerseygirl at 03:51 PM on January 06, 2004
You can be cryptic or clever in the link title, be a bit more descriptive in the link desciption. I have to agree with the J-Girl here forks. Most SpoFiers judge fpp's mostly on their description. I've found that fpps with little or no description as well as those with too precise a description get passed up. Just check the comment counts. No one is haggling over the quality of your links, which is good. Its just the clarity of the post which some find lacking.
posted by lilnemo at 04:00 PM on January 06, 2004
fork, your style rocks. I guess people feel it needs a tweak.
posted by garfield at 04:25 PM on January 06, 2004
I guess people feel it needs a tweak. Slight addendum: I like forks' style too, but I'm not an admin. I was merely theorizing that they were seeking to eschew clarity, at least on the FPP's. You can still wax surreal in the threads.
woo-hoo!
posted by lilnemo at 04:29 PM on January 06, 2004
right, FPP only...and make that a slight tweak.
posted by garfield at 05:03 PM on January 06, 2004
You can still wax surreal in the threads. 
posted by forksclovetofu at 06:33 PM on January 06, 2004
SpoFi: Experimenting Here Until They Get Girlfriends. I hate to admit it, but that's fucking brilliant.
posted by Samsonov14 at 07:56 PM on January 06, 2004
SpoFi: Experimenting Here Until They Get Girlfriends. Does this mean I have to try and be bi?
posted by wfrazerjr at 08:23 PM on January 06, 2004
Wow, that's a pretty big revelation you made, wfrazerjr... You're willing to trade Selanne just as Kariya is coming back to play. I had no idea.
posted by grum@work at 08:47 PM on January 06, 2004
Thank goodness I have a wife already!
posted by billsaysthis at 10:24 PM on January 06, 2004
So Pete Rose, BCS discussions, and Women's Sports are taboo...put it in the posting guidelines as such. Many of us are new, fork's Pete Rose discussion was the first I'd ever seen. Haven't seen much on the BCS proper, and have never seen a Women's Sports discussion. If they are old hat to you then, as is so often suggested for other topic issues, give the thread a pass. If someone wants a moratorium on certain topics, it's simple, dont read or post to those topics, but don't assume new folks here have nothing to add or are sick of the topic as well. On a tangent: Given the backend here, you how do you add to an idea or discussion without some kind of repost (cleverly disguised as a new topic to avoid the double post cops)?. Once a post is off the front page it is gone, for all intents and purposes. Who here fires up the archives looking for new comments? In summary: if a subject is off limits, state it implicitly in the posting guidelines or just give the thread a miss. I would suggest the latter.
posted by pivo at 10:39 PM on January 06, 2004
I'm not saying they are off limits (I don't have that power...yet), but I'm saying that posting those topics is either going to bring down a hellacious flame war, or a whole lotta "Blah...old topic" comments. And please note I posted that Selanne/Kariya thing in the wrong frickin' topic. Stupid multiple tabs!
posted by grum@work at 10:56 PM on January 06, 2004
So Pete Rose, BCS discussions, and Women's Sports are taboo...put it in the posting guidelines as such There are no taboo topics on SportsFilter. If there's an interesting new development in a story, it's suitable for the site regardless of how many times it has been a subject in the past.
posted by rcade at 06:55 AM on January 07, 2004
Grum, the deal done gone down.
posted by wfrazerjr at 09:46 AM on January 07, 2004
It wasn't brilliant or anything, but i've seen worse FPP's... just curious.