
State of the Site: Metafilter financial update and future directions - colinprince
https://metatalk.metafilter.com/24814/State-of-the-Site-Metafilter-financial-update-and-future-directions
======
cimmanom
Metafilter might be the internet community with the single highest quality of
discourse on the internet. Yes, easily outdoing even HN. I really hope it
comes through this intact.

~~~
AndrewKemendo
I disagree with this, but not because MeFi users are wont to flame or bait or
argue in bad faith by default.

I paid for a membership almost a decade ago and haven't been on Metafilter in
probably 6 years now. Even back around 2012 it was getting to the point where
there was a clear ideological bent - namely a postmodernist, anti-capitalist,
anarcho-socialist-lite, ideology. That would be all well and good except
arguing from any other pov, if only for argument sake, would get piled on and
not discussed in a way conducive to productive conversation.

Seems to be happening everywhere on the web now - including HN. Just this week
someone argued that this statement I posted was "almost racist":

 _I also don 't think this is desirable as a framework for AGI - as humans,
despite our intelligent status, are quite unstable and sub-optimal in groups._

How someone gets "racist" from that statement is really mind boggling. Not
exactly a great environment for discussion.

~~~
tptacek
It looks like they just mis-read you as saying that there are particular sub-
groups of humans that are sub-optimally intelligent, when what you charitably
appear to be saying is that evidence of our intelligence as a species gets
cloudy when we start working in groups as opposed to individuals.

~~~
AndrewKemendo
_evidence of our intelligence as a species gets cloudy when we start working
in groups as opposed to individuals._

Indeed. I strive for clarity above all things in my writing, but it seems
increasingly impossible to navigate the minefield of offense-taking. I try to
largely ignore it, but prevailing ideologies don't really care about arguments
that are controversial, and immediately jump to labeling.

~~~
tptacek
I don't know. In basically no other place in my adult life other than Hacker
News am I ever seriously confronted, by people I'm actually talking to, with
the idea that non-white people are inferior to white people (intellectually or
otherwise). It basically only happens to me here. And the (bogus) argument
that science conclusively shows certain racially-defined subgroups to be
inferior is the most common form that sentiment takes. So I wouldn't be
surprised if people here were hypervigilant about that.

I'm not looking for people to be racist (I get a sinking feeling in my stomach
when someone whose comments I've read before on HN says something that betrays
a belief in racial superiority; it's not pleasant). But I am pretty regularly
on the lookout for subtle or coded appeals to that logic.

~~~
AndrewKemendo
And as we can see, simply stating your opinion here - which is effectively
anti-racist and anti-fascist gets you grayed out.

However I do encounter racists in my daily life and it's pretty unnerving - if
only because I or my father have been on the receiving end of their racism
(we're not white by the way). So I'm acutely aware of it, yet I'm hesitant to
bring up any argument that is counter-narrative - irrespective of whether the
argument is about race or not - for fear of being singled out.

I think - based on what dang has commented to me personally and I've read
elsewhere - HN has taken the approach that political/social controversy in and
of itself is counterproductive to reasonable online dialog, so anything that
has even a whiff of polarization needs to be very closely monitored. Obviously
that's a matter of judgement and while I disagree, it's apparently the
direction they want to go, so be it.

~~~
sctb
I think the relevant guideline puts it well:

> _Comments should get more civil and substantive, not less, as a topic gets
> more divisive._

~~~
pvg
The inadequacy of this guideline and couching most moderation along its lines
is why the problem and 'dynamics' as tptacek puts it, exist in the first
place.

The site selects for and breeds civil, substantive racists and misogynists
(along with the hyper-sensitized responses) like a hospital breeds antibiotic-
resistant superbugs.

~~~
Anderkent
I can see selects for, but breeds seems a stretch. Unless you mean breeds
civility within racists and misogynists, which seems beneficial?

~~~
pvg
Yes, mostly the second thing. It's the opposite of beneficial - because the
guidelines say 'don't be a meanie/obvious blowhard' and most people who get
called out for anything are called out for something along those lines, bigots
who adapt to these can and sometimes do last on the site for _years_.

HN's mods put in a great deal of effort in and are surprisingly successful at
containing the far more basic and common human impulse to be a jerk to
strangers online. They have rules, they enforce them, they publicly shame
rulebreakers, etc. You are explicitly not allowed to be an asshat on HN and
everyone knows it. The place would be better if 'don't be a bigot' got the
same treatment. All caps users and transgressors against HN's fundamentalist
quotation marks cult† are exposed to more public opprobrium than your typical
"human biodiversity" sea lion.

†This bit is a dumb[1] joke[2]

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumb](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumb)

[2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke)

------
Grue3
I haven't heard of Metafilter in forever, it always seemed like a pretty
obscure community. How come it takes $38000 a month to run this site? It can't
be getting that much traffic.

EDIT: ok, upon reading the TFA most of it goes to pay the wages of employees,
but what do they all do is unclear.

~~~
DoreenMichele
Last I checked: There are multiple moderators and one Tech guy. Historically,
they prided themselves on providing "real jobs" with adequate pay and
benefits.

The numbers I'm seeing suggest the full time staff probably make better than
$50k/year and the part-time staff likely make some pro-rated equivalent, so to
speak.

