It has come to my attention that some readers do not understand what meta is, or they wish I would specify a rule or criterion in deciding what is meta or what is not.
I am too lazy to do this, and I would refer these people back to my 2nd blog post where Rachel lays out what meta means in philosophy speak.
And I would add that the whole point of meta is that sometimes, you just KNOW. It doesn't require explanation. It's that gut feel, "oh hey, how meta!" What, you haven't had that?
But I will say this. There are two main lines of questioning when it comes to meta.
First we have the comparatives:
"Out of X, Y, and Z, which is the most meta?"
Then we have the absolutes:
"Is there such a thing as a meta X
Can a meta version of a Y exist
Is Z meta? I can't decide."
I'm still grappling with which sort to pursue, so for now it will be a mix of both.