Re: A Rash of Unpublishing

1

Not to publish at all. The fact that the asker wasn't one of the participants is part of the reason I think this.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 11:07 AM
horizontal rule
2

Yeah. I think that post shouldn't have gone up at all -- privacy concerns forbade a full version of the facts, and the conversation was distorted in a really freaky way by the incompleteness of it all. The 'fantasy sex' reaction to the story was very off, in retrospect.

This is actually a version of the other dramatic and unpublished post -- maybe a rule that if the juicy part of the story isn't the asker's own secret, that before publishing, you need to ask whether it's okay if the post ends up on the front page of the Times. If not, don't go there.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 11:11 AM
horizontal rule
3

And, for that reason, the previous recent unpublished post would be okay?


Posted by: NickS | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 11:12 AM
horizontal rule
4

I'd say post and then unpublish, ad hoc. Fast rules should always be avoided. Did the asker benefit from the asking?


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 11:13 AM
horizontal rule
5

Better not to publish than to publish and take down.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 11:13 AM
horizontal rule
6

3: Well, no. The conclusion last time was that it wasn't okay with the asker for him to have publicized other people's secrets, which is why it was unpublished. That question probably should have been asked on the front end.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 11:15 AM
horizontal rule
7

So what's your list of person's who have your unstated consent to wake you to sex? I assume Scarlett Johanson, Angelina Jolie and Fontana Labs make everybody's list.


Posted by: Michael | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 11:15 AM
horizontal rule
8

3: Oh, the recent one. Yeah, sure. That seems like a totally different issue, and one that's at the whim of the bloggers.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 11:15 AM
horizontal rule
9

The one I totally missed, you jerks.

As far as the recent one: I'd appreciate it if you got my permission before publishing any more details of my torrid affair, thanks.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 11:44 AM
horizontal rule
10

What the hell happened? I hate this place.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 11:59 AM
horizontal rule
11

don't be so shy, people. Any Jeffrey Sachs fans? Humanitarianism is sexy!


Posted by: Michael | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 12:04 PM
horizontal rule
12

10: Nothing in terms of factual revelations since your last comment. It was a true story from will's professional life, and ogged (possibly will too) got jumpy about maybe people involved in real life seeing it.

I don't remember exactly when your last comment was, but the end of the thread was mostly me being cranky about sexual assault, and other people trying to continue talking about the situation as described.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 12:05 PM
horizontal rule
13

Post then unpublish, and release it later on the Unfogged: Director's Cut DVD.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 12:13 PM
horizontal rule
14

my sense of time is precise like stopwatch


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 12:18 PM
horizontal rule
15

I'm trying to think what the "previously redacted post" would be, and realize that there could've been one redacted that I didn't see -- what with it being all redacted and all -- but as for the previously redacted one in which I was involved, well, I like the post-then-unpublished approach, because the advice contained therein was critical to me doing the right thing.


Posted by: SEK | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 12:24 PM
horizontal rule
16

12: Ah, so now Will just has to tell us what the upshot was. Will?


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 12:30 PM
horizontal rule
17

The main lesson I learned from the redacted thread is that I should thank the gods daily that I am not a lawyer, and thank them hourly that I am not a divorce lawyer.


Posted by: rob helpy-chalk | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 12:33 PM
horizontal rule
18

15: I was thinking about your post. Did you really get any useful advice, though? I remember people telling you not to spill, and then you spilled and everything else came out, and then everyone told you that what you had done was right. But if I remember the sequence of events right, you got more post-facto support than you got good advice.

(And really, your thread was sui generis -- when it started, there wasn't any way to tell what a big public deal it was.)


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 12:41 PM
horizontal rule
19

"Publish and be damned," to quote the Peer.


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 12:55 PM
horizontal rule
20

The way I remember the thread referred to in 15, he got advice to not spill, then more facts came out, the advice changed to spill, and the rest followed.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 1:08 PM
horizontal rule
21

This is why I hate being in radically different timezone than the rest of you lot - coming in right after the post that's just too exciting to keep up has finally been deleted is soooooo frustrating . . .


Posted by: Cleo | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 1:18 PM
horizontal rule
22

Ad hoc all the way. I think it's best to not think of Unfogged as having any institutional principles, just to be useful for and excellent to each other. Concerns of privacy, kindness, and entertainment come naturally, but some sort of journalistic obligation to not disappearing truth down the memory hole would be a bit much.

SEK's event was the single most awesome thing on the Internet that I have ever been remotely involved in. All due caveats for pain to the people involved, but still.


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 1:23 PM
horizontal rule
23

And all this time I thought the Ask The Mineshafts were all invented, like letters to advice columns. Now I don't know what to think. Were they really real? or is Ogged just taking the pretense of reality one step further? You know it's really hard being paranoid.


Posted by: jim | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 1:24 PM
horizontal rule
24

LB, I think Walt has it right. Looking at the transcripit, when Di Kotomy, B., and soubzriquet shifted to the "you must tell her" line, I immediately picked up the phone, lest I chicken out.


Posted by: SEK | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 1:39 PM
horizontal rule
25

There was an interesting question that was posed in that thread**, iirc, about what men think when they're having sex and they go limp when they shouldn't. Are they blaming the woman? Themselves? The universe?

**NOT BY ME.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 1:48 PM
horizontal rule
26

probably blaming their own stupidity for not getting viagra.


Posted by: Will | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 1:53 PM
horizontal rule
27

I certainly blame myself. But I don't see it as that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things, or the end of the sex act.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 1:56 PM
horizontal rule
28

22:I think it's best to not think of Unfogged as having any institutional principles, just to be useful for and excellent to each other.

And here I was about to suggest adopting Senate rule XIX.2 almost verbatim:

No Senator commenter in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator commenter or to other Senators commenters any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator commenter.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 1:56 PM
horizontal rule
29

25: And for what foul reason would you want to revisit that question?


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 1:58 PM
horizontal rule
30

28: happily, there is no such behavior.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:06 PM
horizontal rule
31

25: Yeah, that was an interesting question.

On the general issue of posting then unpublishing, hate to say it, I tend to go with Cala's "Better not to publish than to publish and take down."

Mostly because an ad-hoc approach can easily lead to people having second thoughts every other week (a rash of them, even), then the blog administrators are in much more of a moderating position with respect to the reasonableness of the second thoughts ... slippery slope. It wouldn't be a great idea to see threads containing content generated with the back thought: After all, it can always be taken down.

That's an extreme scenario, of course, but to my own surprise, I'm coming down on the side of self-censorship.


Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:07 PM
horizontal rule
32

Not self-censorship, parsley mon. Good judgment.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:08 PM
horizontal rule
33

Perhaps when the mid-coital man goes limp, he is merely protecting the sanctity of off-blog emanations?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:09 PM
horizontal rule
34

It is self-censorship to not immediately say anything that pops into your head to the widest possible audience. To be truly honest in our communications, this is the standard to which we must adhere.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:11 PM
horizontal rule
35

30: True enough. Both for Unfogged commenters and US Senators.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:12 PM
horizontal rule
36

Fuck you, Sifu, and the horse you rode in on.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:12 PM
horizontal rule
37

There, that's the way!

I had a terrific shit earlier. I wish I had pictures.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:12 PM
horizontal rule
38

Fucking A! Blog Commenting Tourette's rules the Unfogged scene!


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:15 PM
horizontal rule
39

Not self-censorship, parsley mon. Good judgment.

Same thing, same thing.


Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:15 PM
horizontal rule
40

COME IN MY MOUTH MRS. LINCOLN


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:16 PM
horizontal rule
41

I wish you did too, Sifu.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:16 PM
horizontal rule
42

27 is exactly right, though I'd say "take responsibility for" over "blame". Men in this position should take it as an opportunity to take up rugmunching with abandon.

I found myself there several times during my separation. "This might be touch and go," I explained to a woman who picked me up the week after my wife and I split for good. A fun time was had by all.

The last explanation should be that the woman is doing it wrong or unattractive. A poorly administered BJ can detumesce a fellow, but even then, it's because he's not fully present.


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:17 PM
horizontal rule
43

The asshole of a lifetime! In Long Beach, California!


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:17 PM
horizontal rule
44

"Wrongshore: steering the conversation back to ED since 2007."


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:18 PM
horizontal rule
45

27 is exactly right, though I'd say "take responsibility for" over "blame".

No, I blame myself for not doing enough cardiovascular exercise.

Men in this position should take it as an opportunity to take up rugmunching with abandon.

Indeed.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:18 PM
horizontal rule
46

Men in this position should blame Cryptic Ned for not doing enough cardio-vascular exercise. Better?


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:20 PM
horizontal rule
47

I had a huge hard-on the whole time watching Fern Gully.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:20 PM
horizontal rule
48

Whose?


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:21 PM
horizontal rule
49

Dunno, it was detached.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:22 PM
horizontal rule
50

That huge hard-on you were so selfishly keeping to yourself might have belonged to someone in the midst of coitus, who could have used it.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:22 PM
horizontal rule
51

Yeah, I'd figure that sort of thing would have to be chalked up to physiological things that just happen, rather than blaming it on insufficient attractiveness or manliness. And letting it get in the way of an otherwise enjoyable encounter seems closed-minded.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:22 PM
horizontal rule
52

Or maybe we could just recognize that erections, like so many other things about sex, aren't under one's conscious control, so blame isn't an issue.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:23 PM
horizontal rule
53

27 is exactly right, though I'd say "take responsibility for" over "blame". Men in this position should take it as an opportunity to take up rugmunching with abandon.

I found myself there several times during my separation. "This might be touch and go," I explained to a woman who picked me up the week after my wife and I split for good. A fun time was had by all.

The last explanation should be that the woman is doing it wrong or unattractive. A poorly administered BJ can detumesce a fellow, but even then, it's because he's not fully present.

This made me laugh out loud. I'm so easy.


Posted by: Will | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:23 PM
horizontal rule
54

Evidently the person to blame is Sifu, erection-collector.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:23 PM
horizontal rule
55

50: I didn't realize it was there until almost the end of the popcorn.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:23 PM
horizontal rule
56

54: priapism is forever.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:24 PM
horizontal rule
57

Or maybe we could just recognize that erections, like so many other things about sex, aren't under one's conscious control, so blame isn't an issue.

In my humble opinion, this is yet another reason why women in their late 30s and older are superior to women in their 20s. Older women understand that these things happen sometimes and that it isnt their fault.

Or, so I am told.


Posted by: Will | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:25 PM
horizontal rule
58

Crap. While I was writing my humorless comment, the thread had to go and get funny. Assholes.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:26 PM
horizontal rule
59

52, I think the question was about what people find themselves thinking even though they know it's not rational to think so.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:26 PM
horizontal rule
60

25: The song following the text of the amorous Greek covers this topic.


Posted by: President Lead Singer Who Doesn't Wish To Be Outed Even Though You've Probably Figured It Out | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:27 PM
horizontal rule
61

59: "it couldn't get any worse"


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:27 PM
horizontal rule
62

Anyway, most of us just blame God, for giving us such massive cocks that it takes an unfeasible amount of blood flow to stiffen them fully.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:28 PM
horizontal rule
63

Or maybe we could just recognize that erections ... aren't under one's conscious control.

Indeed, the reverse is conventionally the case.


Posted by: Gonerill | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:29 PM
horizontal rule
64

63: consciousness is under the control of erections?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:29 PM
horizontal rule
65

59: "Thank god, now maybe he'll focus on me. Oh. No, apparently now I have to reassure him that I don't mind. Jesus christ, I wonder what's on television."


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:30 PM
horizontal rule
66

15: Presumably SEK did the opposite of what the Mineshaft advised. Or perhaps he freely chose to ruin his life.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:30 PM
horizontal rule
67

A poorly administered BJ can detumesce a fellow

Or, you know, one that leaves visible wounds.


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:30 PM
horizontal rule
68

67: In cases of outright drainage, it's OK to direct blame.


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:31 PM
horizontal rule
69

68: or if the disappearance of the erection results not from a lack of tumescence, but from the disappearance of the cock itself.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:32 PM
horizontal rule
70

"Thank god, now maybe he'll focus on me. Oh. No, apparently now I have to reassure him that I don't mind. Jesus christ, I wonder what's on television."

Thesis: thinking and sex do not go well together.


Posted by: Will | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:33 PM
horizontal rule
71

LOL INVISBL HARDON


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:33 PM
horizontal rule
72

69: Again, a gentleman should take responsibility. "Silly me! I should not have left it in the popcorn bin at that movie theater playing Fern Gully!"


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:33 PM
horizontal rule
73

68/69: I was thinking about unintentional damage (can happen), but I guess those ones too.


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:34 PM
horizontal rule
74

65: I think we were talking about instances in which the people were happier with the erection than without.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:34 PM
horizontal rule
75

66: Apparently the latter. And then, the hurricane. NOLA can't catch a break.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:35 PM
horizontal rule
76

74: Oh, so we're back in the realm of male fantasy.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:40 PM
horizontal rule
77

the people were happier with the erection than without.

For instance, say you're at a boring film, and you've just finished your popcorn. Aren't you more likely to enjoy yourself if you've got something to fiddle with?


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:42 PM
horizontal rule
78

Being a boy means never having to say "I have nothing to fiddle with."


Posted by: wrongshore | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:45 PM
horizontal rule
79

Depends on the movie.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:45 PM
horizontal rule
80

Worst BJ ever: a fast car drives of the road straight into a tree. The driver and the passenger are both dead, with the driver's severed penis in the passenger's mouth.

They were both probably better off that way, since they avoided the recriminations, gossip, and cruel jokes.

A good friend of mine heard about this from a well-known trauma surgeon whom I've also met.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:46 PM
horizontal rule
81

78: I hear girls have things to fiddle with as well.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:46 PM
horizontal rule
82

Harder to fit in a popcorn box, tho.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:50 PM
horizontal rule
83

If the movie's that bad, you just leave and go buy some new shoes.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:51 PM
horizontal rule
84

78: For pleasure, sure, but not in the same idle "where are my keys" way that works in every situation.


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:51 PM
horizontal rule
85

78 sb 81


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:52 PM
horizontal rule
86

...with the driver's severed penis in the passenger's mouth.

See Garp, World According to for the alternate outcome to this scenario.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:52 PM
horizontal rule
87

82: who needs some cheap-ass cardboard box to keep your popcorn in, if you're a girl?

84: oh, there they are! Boy, that was uncomfortable.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 2:53 PM
horizontal rule
88

I think we were talking about instances in which the people were happier with the erection than without.

Oh, so we're back in the realm of male fantasy.

BitchPhD: objectively pro-flaccidity. Explains a lot.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 8:28 PM
horizontal rule
89

I'd just like to say that it'd be a damn shame if the phrase "HOO-HAH ON MY WOOZLE" were lost in the mists of the unpublished past. Consider this my attempt to ensure it lives on.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 9:22 PM
horizontal rule
90

Josh, you are entirely correct. All-caps doesn't happen often around here. So shouty, so gleeful. You can feel the grin.


Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 12- 8-07 9:36 PM
horizontal rule
91

I count myself doubly unfortunate for having missed Will's revelation (divorce lawyer is one of those jobs that I would love to experience vicariously), and for coming late to the fascinating topic of spontaneous detumescence.

Strangely, the latter happened to me Saturday night, perhaps at about the time you guys were talking about this. We slept on it and all was well next morning.


Posted by: PerfectlyGoddamnDelightful | Link to this comment | 12- 9-07 9:43 PM
horizontal rule