Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
I don't know if any of you read Comics Buyers Guide magazine, but I just read an interesting editorial by Peter David in the August 2010 issue (#1668) that contained a couple observations that really rang true to me.
I thought I would share these statements with the Paizo community and get your take on them.
Excerpts from an editorial by comics writer Peter David:
In reference to being asked to write a column for Comics Buyers Guide magazine:
"Think about that for a moment. People called. On the phone. Chances are that wouldn't happen now. Instead, they would send succinct electronic messages, either via email or text messages. More than a century after scientific advancement enabled us to vocalize to each other over vast distances, we've managed to reinvent the telegraph and telegram. It's rare that technology moves backward and is hailed as an advancement, but that's where we are."
In reference to anonymity and the Internet:
"Anonymity has changed. A letter writer once sent a missive to Comics Buyers Guide that was highly critical of a pro in the industry. The letter was run under the byline of "Name Withheld." The responses lit up the CBG letters page, and the bulk of the replies centered on the fundamental cowardice of berating someone without signing your name to the attack. With the growth of the Internet, not only is this now commonplace, but anonymous posters angrily protest the notion that what they're doing is remotely cowardly. Multiple times I have been accused of "not understanding" the Internet, even though I've been participating since the mid-1980s. I understand the Internet just fine. What I don't understand is how not having the courage of one's convictions became acceptable."
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I don't know if any of you read Comics Buyers Guide magazine, but I just read an interesting editorial by Peter David in the August 2010 issue (#1668) that contained a couple observations that really rang true to me.
Interesting. I know for me, and my SAD, there are times I retreat behind text instead of calling since it's 'easier'. I do try to think about what I am writing before I hit post. I often fail :-(
As to the 'courage of convictions' I firmly agree. I post on some forums under a pseudonym. In some cases it's because I've used 'The Livewire' for 20+ years now, in others it's because I am posting things that could be detrimental to my family members were they to be associated with it. Here at least, there's no escaping from who I am. And I really try to be tactful, since I have those RPG superstar things after my name, I don't want my rants to reflect on our hosts.
More than a century after scientific advancement enabled us to vocalize to each other over vast distances, we've managed to reinvent the telegraph and telegram. It's rare that technology moves backward and is hailed as an advancement, but that's where we are.
I disagree. The internet is faster and far more reaching than the telegraph. Plus, it allows us to speak, send pictures and send video. Just because someone at any given point chooses not to use all of the options of any particular technology does not relegate that technology to ineffectiveness.
Since your car is parked outside in the parking lot and only serves as shade from the sun for any bugs crawling beneath it, does that make a car and overpriced tarp?
What I don't understand is how not having the courage of one's convictions became acceptable.
Sure, let's put our personal information on the internet because someone might call us 'chicken'.
I am not convinced the internet has turned us all into cowards. Maybe it has offered a glimpse into the true thought process only telepathy could have given us. Maybe humans are really jerks and threat of violence is needed to keep them inline.
I don't know if any of you read Comics Buyers Guide magazine, but I just read an interesting editorial by Peter David in the August 2010 issue (#1668) that contained a couple observations that really rang true to me.
I thought I would share these statements with the Paizo community and get your take on them.
Excerpts from an editorial by comics writer Peter David:
In reference to being asked to write a column for Comics Buyers Guide magazine:
"Think about that for a moment. People called. On the phone. Chances are that wouldn't happen now. Instead, they would send succinct electronic messages, either via email or text messages. More than a century after scientific advancement enabled us to vocalize to each other over vast distances, we've managed to reinvent the telegraph and telegram. It's rare that technology moves backward and is hailed as an advancement, but that's where we are."
In reference to anonymity and the Internet:
"Anonymity has changed. A letter writer once sent a missive to Comics Buyers Guide that was highly critical of a pro in the industry. The letter was run under the byline of "Name Withheld." The responses lit up the CBG letters page, and the bulk of the replies centered on the fundamental cowardice of berating someone without signing your name to the attack. With the growth of the Internet, not only is this now commonplace, but anonymous posters angrily protest the notion that what they're doing is remotely cowardly. Multiple times I have been accused of "not understanding" the Internet, even though I've been participating since the mid-1980s. I understand the Internet just fine. What I don't understand is how not having the courage of one's convictions became acceptable."
Despite oblivious (and amusingly self-assured) assertions to the contrary, Mr. David clearly does not "get" the Internet. Putting your name to something in a magazine (one with a relatively small circulation, to boot) is not the same as putting your name to something on the Internet. Data on the Internet hangs around forever. It's searchable. It's easy to find, and it's only going to get easier. Worse, it's often delivered context-free. Whether Mr. David has figured it out or not, the underlying technology is a total game-changer.
While the idea that we should stand behind everything we've ever said for all time is nice in theory, in practice I don't think many thirtysomethings would be thrilled to find they didn't get a job because of a comic-book rant they posted when they were sixteen. People mature and change. While calling someone who dares to revise an opinion a "flip-flopper' might win points in political circles, I'd really hate to see that sort of thing spread further.
So Mr. David: You fail. Or should I call you on the phone?
|
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
More than a century after scientific advancement enabled us to vocalize to each other over vast distances, we've managed to reinvent the telegraph and telegram. It's rare that technology moves backward and is hailed as an advancement, but that's where we are.I disagree. The internet is faster and far more reaching than the telegraph. Plus, it allows us to speak, send pictures and send video. Just because someone at any given point chooses not to use all of the options of any particular technology does not relegate that technology to ineffectiveness..
Fair enough. However, I don't believe Peter David was referring to the Internet as a whole as a backwards leap in technology. Only in the preference of many of its users to post/write messages instead of talk to someone via the telephone or face to face.
What I don't understand is how not having the courage of one's convictions became acceptable.
Sure, let's put our personal information on the internet because someone might call us 'chicken'.
I am not convinced the internet has turned us all into cowards. Maybe it has offered a glimpse into the true thought process only telepathy could have given us.
Agree.
Maybe humans are really jerks and threat of violence is needed to keep them inline.
You may be onto something here... ;)
|
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
Despite oblivious (and amusingly self-assured) assertions to the contrary, Mr. David clearly does not "get" the Internet. Putting your name to something in a magazine (one with a relatively small circulation, to boot) is not the same as putting your name to something on the Internet. Data on the Internet hangs around forever. It's searchable. It's easy to find, and it's only going to get easier. Worse, it's often delivered context-free. Whether Mr. David has figured it out or not, the underlying technology is a total game-changer.
As I mentioned to CourtFool above, I don't believe Peter David is referring to the underlyng technology as a backward leap, only in the preference of many of its users to communicate using text/email instead of using a telephone, Skype, or any of the other tools that facilitate two way communication.
While the idea that we should stand behind everything we've ever said for all time is nice in theory, in practice I don't think many thirtysomethings would be thrilled to find they didn't get a job because of a comic-book rant they posted when they were sixteen. People mature and change. While calling someone who dares to revise an opinion a "flip-flopper' might win points in political circles, I'd really hate to see that sort of thing spread further.
But (playing devil's advocate here) wouldn't you be less likely to post a meaningless rant if you knew it could be traced back to you and affect your life in some way down the road? Maybe the moral of the editorial should be "think before you post". A buddy of mine told me last week that the World of Warcraft forums are going to a User Name approach to posters to help reduce some of the flame wars and abuse that occurs on their boards. This way, anything that is said will be attributed to the User Name of the subscriber who posted the comment. Perhaps they are following Peter David's thought process as well...
|
While the idea that we should stand behind everything we've ever said for all time is nice in theory, in practice I don't think many thirtysomethings would be thrilled to find they didn't get a job because of a comic-book rant they posted when they were sixteen.
If I found a prospective employee had once called (say) Rob Liefield a talentless hack, I'd be glad to shake him by the hand.
Fair enough. However, I don't believe Peter David was referring to the Internet as a whole as a backwards leap in technology. Only in the preference of many of its users to post/write messages instead of talk to someone via the telephone or face to face.
A good point and one I had not considered. Still not buying it. Walking has health benefits over driving. I sometimes prefer e-mail to talking face to face with someone because it gives me an opportunity to collect my thoughts. It also facilitates me responding to multiple points without going down one path of conversation and forgetting or running out of time to address other points. Also, it can be useful to CYA when your boss tries to say they never told you to do something.
|
|
Here at least, there's no escaping from who I am. And I really try to be tactful, since I have those RPG superstar things after my name, I don't want my rants to reflect on our hosts.
I was discussing this with Josh at the weekend, as some of the posters I am used to conversing as their aliases have recently evolved into contributors, and are now having to use their real names.
Do all of your posts have to be made under your real name?
Is there any allowance for play-by-post aliases, or silly posts under a comedic sock-puppet?
Despite oblivious (and amusingly self-assured) assertions to the contrary, Mr. David clearly does not "get" the Internet. Putting your name to something in a magazine (one with a relatively small circulation, to boot) is not the same as putting your name to something on the Internet. Data on the Internet hangs around forever. It's searchable. It's easy to find, and it's only going to get easier. Worse, it's often delivered context-free. Whether Mr. David has figured it out or not, the underlying technology is a total game-changer.As I mentioned to CourtFool above, I don't believe Peter David is referring to the underlyng technology as a backward leap, only in the preference of many of its users to communicate using text/email instead of using a telephone, Skype, or any of the other tools that facilitate two way communication.
But (playing devil's advocate here) wouldn't you be less likely to post a meaningless rant if you knew it could be traced back to you and affect your life in some way down the road? Maybe the moral of the editorial should be "think before you post". A buddy of mine told me last week that the World of Warcraft forums are going to a User Name approach to posters to help reduce some of the flame wars and abuse that occurs on their boards. This way, anything that is said will be attributed to the User Name of the subscriber who posted the comment. Perhaps they are following Peter David's thought process as well...While the idea that we should stand behind everything we've ever said for all time is nice in theory, in practice I don't think many thirtysomethings would be thrilled to find they didn't get a job because of a comic-book rant they posted when they were sixteen. People mature and change. While calling someone who dares to revise an opinion a "flip-flopper' might win points in political circles, I'd really hate to see that sort of thing spread further.
Actually, they've since back-pedalled on that idea. But that's beside the point.
Would I be less likely to post a meaningless rant? Probably. But I might also be less likely to post a carefully-considered opinion if I knew it could be used against me later, especially in a context-free, undated, one-sided manner. In my opinion, the value gained by having unfettered communication outweighs the damage caused by those who abuse the system.
Can we agree that, for the reasons enumerated in my last post, a letter to an editor is not a very good analogy in this case?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
buggly, I'm going to have to disagree (again, surprise, I know)
Back in the days of letter columns, it was standard practice to withold some or all of the address, if the writer wished. Witholding the name of the letter writer was something else entirely.
I post under 'The Livewire' because even before it was my internet nick, it was my CB nick. There's still a difference between posting under my name, and posting 'my information.' Heck, you google Matthew Morris you're going to get musicians and baseball players before you get me. You might even get my good twin* before me.
Recently Norm Breyfogle posted his belief that he's been blacklisted from Marvel and DC. link Now that has more impact than 'Anon35252 says that Norm Breyfogle was blacklisted.'
I'm sure we remember the 'is it really Jenny' argument when Ms. Pousin started posting here. Lisa and Vic confirmed it, and that settled it. I think people 'post first, think later' more often when they don't have to admit who they are.**
*
**
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Here at least, there's no escaping from who I am. And I really try to be tactful, since I have those RPG superstar things after my name, I don't want my rants to reflect on our hosts.I was discussing this with Josh at the weekend, as some of the posters I am used to conversing as their aliases have recently evolved into contributors, and are now having to use their real names.
Do all of your posts have to be made under your real name?
Is there any allowance for play-by-post aliases, or silly posts under a comedic sock-puppet?
No, I can use aliases, but my default is, well, me. *shrug* Plus, it does serve to keep me in check, which is just as well for me.
|
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
Can we agree that, for the reasons enumerated in my last post, a letter to an editor is not a very good analogy in this case?
Actually, I believe it's a very good analogy. Both a letter on a letters page and a post on an internet forum can be used and abused the same ways you mention in your post:
it could be used against me later, especially in a context-free, undated, one-sided manner
It would take more effort to do so using comments on a letter page, but comments in both places have the potential to be misused by those inclined to do so. Heck, Charles Barkley indicated he was misquoted in a book WRITTEN BY HIM!!
As such, a letters page is a very valid analogy when discussing messages posted on a Internet forum.
Anytime and anyplace comments are posted, whether in a magazine, an internet forum, a chat room, an email message, a letter, voice mail, etc. there is a possibility of those comments being misconstrued and/or taken out of context. Which brings back my point of "think before you post". If your comments ARE well thought out and considered, it is less likely your comments will come back to haunt you, and it becomes easier to refute anyone trying to use them against you.
There is a good chance that if people had to identify themselves when they post information, we would see more well thought out comments and less flame wars.
Yeah, I'm going to have to disagree on the analogy part. I work in IT*, so I'm pretty in touch with the difference between a letter in a dead-tree magazine and an online post. The degree to which the data can take on a life of it's own differs by orders of magnitude, and decisions about information disclosure should be made with that new reality in mind.
That said, there is something to the idea that anonymity enables bad behavior. I also think it frees people to be more open about expressing an unpopular opinon. Overall, I think it's a worthwhile trade-off.
* Not intended as an appeal to authority; just to give a little context. This is the sort of thing we IT geeks think about; that doesn't make us right.
|
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
Fair enough. However, I don't believe Peter David was referring to the Internet as a whole as a backwards leap in technology. Only in the preference of many of its users to post/write messages instead of talk to someone via the telephone or face to face.A good point and one I had not considered. Still not buying it. Walking has health benefits over driving. I sometimes prefer e-mail to talking face to face with someone because it gives me an opportunity to collect my thoughts. It also facilitates me responding to multiple points without going down one path of conversation and forgetting or running out of time to address other points. Also, it can be useful to CYA when your boss tries to say they never told you to do something.
All valid points regarding email.
However, I'll ask you to consider the other aspect to Peter David's analogy: the Text Message. If email/internet forums are the equivalent of the telegram, then the text message is the equivalent of the telegraph based on Peter David's editorial.
What is your take on the preponderance of text messaging in lieu of telephone conversation - especially since most text messages are sent USING A TELEPHONE?