Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Peter · 07:43 PM

Appletalker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Appletalker was founded at the beginning of february 2006 by a breakaway group of core long-time MacNN forum users in direct response to a decision by MacNN management to introduce intelliTXT spam advertising into their discussion forum users’ posts, without any consultation with the forum members themselves.

Appletalker was founded by stíobhart matulevicz [AKA madra] by personally inviting a group of twenty macNN regulars to help found the new venture. these 'founders' were chosen for their knowledge and history of useful contribution to macNN. this has enabled appletalker to avoid the trap that many macNN breakaway forums have fallen into in the past, by providing a viable alternative source of apple expertise - instead of merely being an alternative forum, with little or no useful content.

Nuts.

- - e r i k - - · Aug 21, 2006, 08:00 PM

Appletalker was founded by stíobhart matulevicz [AKA madra] by personally inviting a group of twenty macNN regulars to help found the new venture. these 'founders' were chosen for their knowledge and history of useful contribution to macNN

Awww. Shucks

Lateralus · Aug 21, 2006, 08:17 PM

Chuckit · Aug 21, 2006, 08:21 PM

I'm drowning in the tears!

Seriously, that's all pretty factual, though I don't think AppleTalker is noteworthy enough to merit a Wikipedia entry. It was formed in response to the IntelliTXT thing, and it was started with a core of a couple dozen MacNN members who Madra considered knowledgeable.

Peter · Aug 21, 2006, 08:25 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

I'm drowning in the tears!

Seriously, that's all pretty factual, though I don't think AppleTalker is noteworthy enough to merit a Wikipedia entry. It was formed in response to the IntelliTXT thing, and it was started with a core of a couple dozen MacNN members who Madra considered knowledgeable.

factual maybe, but you can't honestly say that article deserves to be on wikipedia? Its just copied from your forum front page!

Chuckit · Aug 21, 2006, 08:30 PM

No. It's totally lacking in useful information. I wouldn't say nuts, though.

- - e r i k - - · Aug 21, 2006, 08:36 PM

Huh? Apparently This user marked it for deletion:

This user is currently experiencing mental health issues that may affect his or her ability to work on Wikipedia. Please bear in mind that these issues may temporarily affect this user's judgement, and the user may occasionally be unable to carry out their usual Wikipedia duties. This user may not consequently be able to respond to talk page messages or e-mails in a timely manner during affected periods, and your patience is greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Whoa.

Peter · Aug 21, 2006, 08:38 PM

I marked it for deletion i thought. And i certainly dont have health issues.
Ah!

Gamoe · Aug 21, 2006, 08:45 PM

There are entries of far less "important" people, groups and organizations on Wikipedia. Therefore, I don't see why AppleTalker shouldn't have its own entry.

And by the way, Peter, I don't know if it was your intention, but this threads seriously reeks of baiting, and it should probably be locked, per MacNN's own policies and precedence.

Peter · Aug 21, 2006, 08:52 PM

no baiting, just surprise really

Chuckit · Aug 21, 2006, 08:59 PM

Why did you underline parts if the main point is just that it isn't noteworthy? Doesn't underlining generally indicate that something is worthy of note?

Doofy · Aug 21, 2006, 09:02 PM

Originally Posted by Peter

no baiting, just surprise really

Oh come on - you were surprised? I'm surprised Madra ain't put his toenail clippings up on Wiki, being the WikiWhore that he is.

(No offence Madra, if yer reading.)

Oisín · Aug 22, 2006, 04:15 AM

Originally Posted by Peter

factual maybe, but you can't honestly say that article deserves to be on wikipedia? Its just copied from your forum front page!

I thought the goal of Wikipedia was that, ultimately, it would contain information about more or less absolutely everything in the world. How can something then not be worth having there? I have, actually, found myself (once) searching for information about some old, long-gone Internet forum—and I found it on Wikipedia: a description of the forum, who started it, when it was started, etc.

As long as a page isn’t factually misleading (which the AppleTalker page isn’t, though it might be labelled of questionable objectivity), I don’t see any reason it shouldn’t be on Wikipedia.

mac128k-1984 · Aug 22, 2006, 05:56 AM

I just popped over there and its a ghost town. Not much activity, but I'm not surprised. Wikki stating that they came from here as disgruntled users and tried to do their own thing.

The only thing that bothers me is that I see a few people here that have AT links in their sigs. If AT is so great post there - seems trollish to me.

Peter · Aug 22, 2006, 06:11 AM

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales

There are entries of far less "important" people, groups and organizations on Wikipedia. Therefore, I don't see why AppleTalker shouldn't have its own entry.

And by the way, Peter, I don't know if it was your intention, but this threads seriously reeks of baiting, and it should probably be locked, per MacNN's own policies and precedence.

link some?
wikipedia has always been impressively fast and democratic at removing not yet important enough articles.

Oisín · Aug 22, 2006, 06:18 AM

*sigh*

We’ve been through this before—several times. Does it matter if a few people have AT links in their sigs? If I recall correctly, even the mods/admins here said it was no problem, as long as the AT vs. MacNN bickerfest threads got canned, which they did. Nobody ever makes a fuss about people who have links to other blogs or forums in their sigs; why should a link to AppleTalker be any different?

Can’t those who don’t like AppleTalker or want nothing to do with it simply ignore it? This is not a competition for members. It’s not a popularity contest. It’s not a matter of stealing each other’s members. It’s just a matter of coexisting peacefully, without attacking each other—in fact, just pretty much ignoring each other. Is that really so hard?

Edit. In response to Michael’s post, not Peter’s, obviuosly.

Peter · Aug 22, 2006, 06:22 AM

I didn't start this thread to bash AT or anything, I was just surprised at the way the article had been written. To me it looked as if it was just openly insulting MacNN. Maybe it was just me.

Kevin · Aug 22, 2006, 06:27 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

Awww. Shucks

Don't feel special. I was invited too.

Just never really posted there.

From their actions on here after it was made, I am glad.

All the little "disgruntled" forum are lame.

Always have been. They consist of bitching about this forum and it's members. And planning little flames here.

Gamoe · Aug 22, 2006, 06:31 AM

Originally Posted by mac128k-1984

I just popped over there and its a ghost town.

A board with a little under 100 members is not going to have the same activity level as a board with over 60,000 members. However AppleTalker is no ghost town.

Originally Posted by mac128k-1984

The only thing that bothers me is that I see a few people here that have AT links in their sigs. If AT is so great post there - seems trollish to me.

Sorry it bothers you. Maybe you can block those sigs somehow via your browser. However, we've had this discussion before and I won't have it yet again. The sigs are legit and they stay. *End of topic.*

Originally Posted by Peter

link some?

Policies? Well, this is a troll-ish thread, no doubt. And mods have deleted all threads started about AppleTalker before, so this one should be no different.

Originally Posted by Peter

wikipedia has always been impressively fast and democratic at removing not yet important enough articles.

Right, and that was your true, impartial motivation for recommending it for deletion.

Peter · Aug 22, 2006, 06:35 AM

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales

Right, and that was your true, impartial motivation for recommending it for deletion.

yes...?
You shouldn't be so offended that I marked your article is marked for deletion.

Simon · Aug 22, 2006, 06:35 AM

Originally Posted by Oisín

*sigh*
Can’t those who don’t like AppleTalker or want nothing to do with it simply ignore it? This is not a competition for members. It’s not a popularity contest. It’s not a matter of stealing each other’s members. It’s just a matter of coexisting peacefully, without attacking each other—in fact, just pretty much ignoring each other. Is that really so hard?

Seconded.

Some people seriously need to grow up.

The irony of this unnecessary thread is, that in the end all that will have changed is that the AT and MacNN Wikipedia articles will have been deleted and a few people will have insulted each other. What an achievement!

Oisín · Aug 22, 2006, 06:36 AM

Originally Posted by Peter

I didn't start this thread to bash AT or anything, I was just surprised at the way the article had been written. To me it looked as if it was just openly insulting MacNN. Maybe it was just me.

Perhaps not insulting MacNN as such, but I agree it lacks a certain objectivity/neutrality and tone one would expect from an encyclopaedic article.

All the little "disgruntled" forum are lame. Always have been. They consist of bitching about this forum and it's members. And planning little flames here.

Not really, no. After the initial inter-forum attacks between MacNN and AT, MacNN has really taken up very little space on AppleTalker, and vice versa, for a long time now.

Apart from Cubeoid’s forum (which, as far as I could make out, was created specifically with the dual aim of slagging MacNN and making as little sense as possible), I haven’t seen any forums that “consist of bitching about” MacNN or its members, any more than MacNN “consists of bitching” about Ars, Slashdot and various other forums that people here dislike (and whose names I can’t even remember, having never actually bothered to visit them)—meaning that it pops up from time to time, but is not a part of the forum, as you seem to think.

Seconded.

Some people seriously need to grow up.

Indeed—and it goes both ways, too. Some AppleTalkers would do well to learn to simply ignore MacNN (or rather, ignore MacNN when it deals with AppleTalker), as well.

Kevin · Aug 22, 2006, 06:37 AM

Originally Posted by Simon

Seconded.

Some people seriously need to grow up.

You must have missed the AppleTalker spam threads. And then the threads after that complaining said threads were getting locked.

Not really, no. After the initial inter-forum attacks between MacNN and AT, MacNN has really taken up very little space on AppleTalker, and vice versa, for a long time now.

This could very well be true about AT, as I haven't been there since.

Apart from Cubeoid’s forum (which, as far as I could make out, was created specifically with the dual aim of slagging MacNN and making as little sense as possible), I haven’t seen any forums that “consist of bitching about” MacNN or its members, any more than MacNN “consists of bitching” about Ars, Slashdot and various other forums that people here dislike (and whose names I can’t even remember, having never actually bothered to visit them)—meaning that it pops up from time to time, but is not a part of the forum, as you seem to think.

Well you are correct about Cube's forum (Is it even Cube's? )

Not MacNN :: View topic - MacNN prank

Some people have issues.

Peter · Aug 22, 2006, 06:39 AM

swings and roundabouts.

Eug · Aug 22, 2006, 06:42 AM

People actually care about AppleTalker?

Oisín · Aug 22, 2006, 06:43 AM

This could very well be true about AT, as I haven't been there since.

Precisely—let’s just try and keep it that way, okay? [I mean, with The Other Place taking up little-to-no space on both forums, not with you not having been there]

swings and roundabouts.

Er... banana couch?

People actually care about AppleTalker? :o

Only a few, thankfully (apart from the members of AT, obviously)

Gamoe · Aug 22, 2006, 06:47 AM

Originally Posted by Oisín

Can’t those who don’t like AppleTalker or want nothing to do with it simply ignore it?

No, they can't. I browse and post here all the time, and even reference some posts from here from time to time and no one has a problem with that on AppleTalker. But to fanatical MacNN members you're either "with them" or "against them". You can't like posting on another board and have a link to it.

But again, I am not discussing the sig issue. That is over and done with a dozen times over.

Originally Posted by Peter

To me it looked as if it was just openly insulting MacNN. Maybe it was just me.

Yup, it was.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Don't feel special. I was invited too.

Just never really posted there...

Constructive and accurate comments, Kevin

[/not]

Originally Posted by Peter

yes...?
You shouldn't be so offended that I marked your article is marked for deletion.

Well, I hope you don't feel offended when you get some of your own medicine coming your way.

Originally Posted by Oisín

I haven’t seen any forums that “consist of bitching about” MacNN or its members...

But to a MacNN fanatical, everything has to be about MacNN.

Peter · Aug 22, 2006, 06:50 AM

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales

Well, I hope you don't feel offended when you get some of your own medicine coming your way.

Okay. Getting a bit weird now...

Eug · Aug 22, 2006, 06:52 AM

Originally Posted by Peter

To me it looked as if it was just openly insulting MacNN. Maybe it was just me.

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales

Yup, it was.

No it wasn't. Seems like a thinly veiled shot at MacNN to me. Not that it matters though.

Doofy · Aug 22, 2006, 06:55 AM

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales

But to a MacNN fanatical, everything has to be about MacNN.

Or boobies.

Oisín · Aug 22, 2006, 06:59 AM

No, they can't. I browse and post here all the time, and even reference some posts from here from time to time and no one has a problem with that on AppleTalker. But to fanatical MacNN members you're either "with them" or "against them". You can't like posting on another board and have a link to it.

Sorry, what do you reference where from where? I can’t quite make sense of that sentence...

But calling some MacNN members fanatical and saying it’s ‘either you’re with us or against us’ is precisely what neither AppleTalker nor MacNN needs, and exactly what will perpetuate this completely futile and unnecessary bickerfest. That particular post of yours came off every bit as “fanatical” as those MacNN members you just called fanatical yourself.

I post and read here all the time, as well as on AppleTalker. I don’t see any conflict, and I don’t find it hard to ignore those (both here and there) who do.

Or boobies.

Best post in this thread so far.

mac128k-1984 · Aug 22, 2006, 07:03 AM

My point is, if AT is so great which they feel the need to justifty how much better it is in their sig, why do they post here and when they do, its typically a negative response.

I'm not a mod here and on a personal level it doesn't bother me at all, its just hypocritical that's all. They say how great AT is but they post it here, why not as they say eat your own dog food and post over there.

Oisín · Aug 22, 2006, 07:08 AM

That’s exactly the discussion that’s been trudged to death already—please, just leave it. Please. It’s not worth it to drag the whole thing through the mud once more.

It’s not “typically a negative response”, though—plenty of AppleTalker members contribute plenty of positive posts here, without ever mentioning AppleTalker, even the ones who have AppleTalker links in their sigs.

Gamoe · Aug 22, 2006, 07:17 AM

Oisín, my point is that I fear no reprieve if I mention MacNN or something on MacNN on AppleTalker but on MacNN it's some kind of crime to actually like posting to another board. I was trying to make a point with my last post.

Why is it that so many people here feel so threatened by and such hatred toward AppleTalker? There is something not right with that picture. What I am saying is that this kind of polarized "with us" or "against us" attitude is what i see here all too often. I just want to be able to post here and on AppleTalker without being insulted and unwelcomed, which is how a lot of people here make me feel. Still I realize it's just a number of "bad apples" and I'm not going to leave a board because of them.

mac128k-1984, I'm sorry that you cannot understand the sig issue. Good luck to you.

Kevin · Aug 22, 2006, 07:23 AM

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales

mac128k-1984, I'm sorry that you cannot understand the sig issue. Good luck to you.

The sig issue was lame. So was using this forum's private message function to spam for your site.

So was the many threads started in this forum promoting said site. Or the many posts made spamming about said site.

Luckily that has stopped for the most part.

Simon · Aug 22, 2006, 07:29 AM

Originally Posted by Kevin

Luckily that has stopped for the most part.

And yet you constantly need to take a public stab at Gabriel and have the last word on the issue.

Let it go for pete's sake. Seriously. This whole discussion will have no consequence other than bad feelings.

Eug · Aug 22, 2006, 07:31 AM

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales

Why is it that so many people here feel so threatened by and such hatred toward AppleTalker? There is something not right with that picture. What I am saying is that this kind of polarized "with us" or "against us" attitude is what i see here all too often. I just want to be able to post here and on AppleTalker without being insulted and unwelcomed, which is how a lot of people here make me feel.

You're surprised that some people at MacNN don't like people posting about a board that openly disses MacNN?

I wouldn't say anyone is "threatened" by AppleTalker. I'd guess that they just think that AppleTalker posts here are annoying, esp. because there was so much spam here about AppleTalker early on.

Anyways, in terms of computer forums, "AT" has been "AnandTech" for a very long time now.

mitchell_pgh · Aug 22, 2006, 08:38 AM

I can remember at least 5+ MacNN killers

AppleTalker seems to be pulling a Howerd Stern )AKA "Just look how against us they are!!!!") when in reality, nobody cares. I'm glad that people that didn't like MacNN made their own forum, but why keep coming back?

davesimondotcom · Aug 22, 2006, 08:40 AM

Does OMGWTFBBQ have a Wikipedia entry?

mitchell_pgh · Aug 22, 2006, 08:45 AM

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom

Does OMGWTFBBQ have a Wikipedia entry?

Are they still around?

Eug · Aug 22, 2006, 08:45 AM

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom

Does OMGWTFBBQ have a Wikipedia entry?

Of course.

OMGWTFBBQ

(It's not really for OMGWTFBBQ but for internet slang in general. However, it's a useful entry IMO.)

mac128k-1984 · Aug 22, 2006, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales

mac128k-1984, I'm sorry that you cannot understand the sig issue. Good luck to you.

Oh I understand it, your advertising a competing forum that you claim is better then 'NN.

I don't think you understand my point. You think AT is superior why post here.

Put it another way if 'NN is so bad that you and others felt compelled to start another forum why do you still post here (if it is indeed so bad). I mean if AT is really the friendly alternative to rational discussions you imply that 'NN isn't why waste your time at a place that you find it irrational?

Gamoe · Aug 22, 2006, 09:27 AM

Originally Posted by mac128k-1984

I don't think you understand my point.

No, you don't seem to understand mine. That issue has already been discussed and settled. Go on and do some meditating if you need further clarity on the subject.

mac128k-1984 · Aug 22, 2006, 09:41 AM

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales

No, you don't seem to understand mine. That issue has already been discussed and settled. Go on and do some meditating if you need further clarity on the subject.

I really don't care. I'm just making an observation that you seem to bash 'nn in your sig and yet here you are posting.

I'm not really trying to sound like a jerk or anything. I just see someone adversiting his site (or one that he belongs too) here. Like you said the issue has been discussed and settled and the owners/mods of 'NN don't seem to mind you advertising AT, so who am I to make an issue out of it.

Regards
Mike

Gamoe · Aug 22, 2006, 09:49 AM

Originally Posted by mac128k-1984

I really don't care.

And I don't really care about your observation either. So we're even!

Originally Posted by mac128k-1984

the owners/mods of 'NN don't seem to mind you advertising AT, so who am I to make an issue out of it.

Exactly. Glad you got the point. Hurray!

Chuckit · Aug 22, 2006, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh

AppleTalker seems to be pulling a Howerd Stern )AKA "Just look how against us they are!!!!") when in reality, nobody cares.

Yeah, that explains why Peter started this thread.

Person Man · Aug 22, 2006, 10:15 AM

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Appletalker was founded by stíobhart matulevicz [AKA madra] by personally spamming a group of twenty macNN regulars to help found the new venture.

Fixed.

(And before any of you say it wasn't spam-- it is by MY definition... ANY UNWANTED OR UNSOLICITED MATERIAL DIRECTED AT ME, whether it be e-mail, private messages, IMs, etc. I didn't want it (or solicit it), therefore it is spam, plain and simple).

Chuckit · Aug 22, 2006, 10:20 AM

I didn't want to read that post, spammer.

Person Man · Aug 22, 2006, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

I didn't want to read that post, spammer.

Directed at me personally.

Stradlater · Aug 22, 2006, 11:10 AM

When did this AppleTalker thing happen?