Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
John Moosie
climber
|
|
|
Jul 19, 2007 - 07:23pm PT
|
Words can be more powerful then physical action. In high school I was put in the hospital by 6 guys who were beating up a mentally retarded kid when I stepped in to try and stop it.
I would take that beating again rather then hear some of the things said to me by people I thought were my friends.
|
|
GDavis
Trad climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Jul 19, 2007 - 08:05pm PT
|
"As for others carrying their internet aggression into the physical world... truly pathetic"
I completely agree! However some people will do that, I can assure you. That is what I was talking about in my post. You can't expect everyone to react the way you want them! To some guys, what you say to them over cyberspace is no different than saying it over a phone or in an email. You don't have to 'understand' why some people do some things, just the same how people don't understand why sh!t talking on a forum can be fun.
If this doesn't make sense to you, meet me after school at the Arbies!
|
|
Raydog
Trad climber
Boulder Colorado
|
|
|
Jul 19, 2007 - 08:13pm PT
|
"sticks and stones can break your bones but words cause permanent damage"
-Eric Bogosian, Talk Radio
and, for Oli:
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
-William Butler Yeats
cheers everyone - good discussion
R.Dog
|
|
Oli
Trad climber
Fruita, Colorado
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 19, 2007 - 10:38pm PT
|
"Controlling what other people can or can't post is not censorship? Interesting, go on...."
If you were having a nice dinner with friends, and one of the children stood up suddenly and started to look as though they were going to throw up all over the table, and started heaving, you'd try to point him/her away from the table or lead him/her off quickly to the bathroom. If you could help it, you wouldn't let the person throw up all over the table. Censorship, on the other hand, is to quiet those with whom you disagree, for example how the Bush administration edited the writings and findings of the various leading scientists who presented reports on global warming. To a man, they complained that their words had been cut and altered, to suit the administration point of view.
In any sort of publication worth its salt, the editors (as they are called) choose what they deem worthy to be in those pages. They're not going to publish insipid little ravings. Even the profanities that appear are not gratuitous. You could accuse those publications of censorship, in that they deny the mediocre thinkers, or even those less than mediocre, the vapid and jejune, those who have the slops, as I think Yeats may have called it... No this is not a publication per se, it is a forum, but even a forum could use a little windshield wiper work to clean off the bird poop.
If someone has something to say, let it fly. But vomit and bird poop are something else. They're not something to "say." If I can't cover your mouth or turn you away, I'm going to get the hell out of there.
|
|
Melissa
Gym climber
berkeley, ca
|
|
|
Jul 19, 2007 - 11:10pm PT
|
Supertopo is not a publication.
Pull up some posts from 2002 or so and see what you think of the level of discourse.
Some of the people spewing that vomit and poop then were living legends too, and there were many folks who were grateful the chance to be shat upon from such a considerable height.
IMO, the content of the forum on the whole is better now than it was then because the people here have made it be so. On the other hand, it's also a bit stuffier and not as playful/heated as it was at times in the past. If there are too many rules and too many poobahs deciding who are the ants and what is ant vomit, Supertopo could just as easily go the way of rec.climbing (dead) or rockclimbing.com (n00bs trying to kill each other).
|
|
Oli
Trad climber
Fruita, Colorado
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 19, 2007 - 11:16pm PT
|
Things that are posted seem to be, in a sense, published, made available to the public, i.e. I'm not trying to make any rules for anyone. I'm trying to talk about the merits or lack of merit, in letting the windshield completely cover over in bug juice. Your insistence on leaving everything bad and good would be no less a "rule," by your own definitions, it would seem. That's why I put the "inquiry" to the webmaster. I never thought I'd get so much "response."
|
|
Raydog
Trad climber
Boulder Colorado
|
|
|
Jul 19, 2007 - 11:32pm PT
|
Here, the definition of "forum" does in fact get blurry since some actually take the time to compose articles, good ones.
Defining this forum as not a publication strikes me as being perhaps technically true but fairly rigid and closed ended and, if anything the internet is a rapidly evolving tool - that this forum can contain "live journalism", (deserving of respect) might be a better description.
|
|
Blowboarder
Boulder climber
Back in the mix
|
|
|
Jul 19, 2007 - 11:59pm PT
|
I for one miss the good ole days of ST, where flamefests outnumbered legitimate topics 10-1 and you could change your poster name with every post. Sh#t, I almost got Bobby D and Doc Kodos booted for a year. Instead, I did the time.
It's supposed to be fun, otherwise we might as well turn off the computer and get back to work.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2007 - 12:03am PT
|
Ok, Pat.
We like to respond, that's why we're here!
Sure, we can wipe the windshield or remove the unruly, colicky child.
Here’s a round picture of the self governed societal model for our unregulated forum.
In the more controlled forum equipped with windshield wipers or a parental figure, the bugs are wiped or the child who is about to vomit on the table is physically removed. That is an external control. Yes it is most expedient and it works. But it is a one sided action. It is quiet now but we didn’t grow or learn from the event; yes, we are now free to engage in more “important” stuff in an unfettered environment, at least for a stretch of time.
In a completely un-moderated forum the onus of governance resides primarily within each and every individual and secondarily but more importantly: it resides within the functional dynamic of the relationships cultivated between these individuals.
The child who is about to vomit in this un-moderated forum, as Wes has aptly indicated, will in most cases only continue to vomit if there exists an audience, or even better, a retort for the vomit, which tends to raise more bile. People looking for a response, looking to rile the crowd rarely persist with their efforts if they are not getting a response, not getting fed or “paid” for their efforts. They want a fight and, heck, we give it to ‘em, so they keep feeding.
So, if we deny them through our restraint then we are choosing to withhold, we are self governing in a very conscious way. Likewise, by gently, almost invisibly prompting them to move away from unproductive behavior, the instigator of unrest, whether consciously or un-consciously, will likely tire of their unrewarded efforts and go somewhere else to play. So the result is they engage in a style of self governance also and remove themselves (…or not, oh well, utopia wasn’t built in a day: in fact it is never built, but the building of it is very instructive, is good work to engage in). Yes, perhaps on the part of the prankster it is a passive, not an active, thoughtful, really groovy Zen baby style of self governance but it is a result of a joint action, a relational action, which involves both sides and benefits both sides.
What I like about this approach, what I find artful about it, is that it exercises a flexible, two sided relational dynamic which proceeds organically. It accepts the risk of failure in a very real way because it may not work: because there exists, aside from the dim light of the “wackamole” no real safety net. Likewise, the gain from this approach feels wholesome, is more deeply felt, is genuinely won and perhaps more durable, because it is a product of mutual consent, a product of internal regulation engaged in either actively or passively by all involved.
This is a very simple dynamic, this disrupter/discipliner scenario. What becomes more challenging are the arguments born often of misunderstanding here on our forum, they too lead to rage, flames, a protracted sloppy hijacking of a nice thread. But that scenario also calls upon all involved to look more closely within, to work with more heart.
Jeepers, how perfectly messy-lovely.
-Tarbaby.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2007 - 12:03am PT
|
I think Oli is starting to learn how to troll us.
This thread just keeps on truckin ......
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2007 - 12:06am PT
|
Bingo.
I know, I mean I suspect, he talks to Lois offline, sumtimes...
|
|
Raydog
Trad climber
Boulder Colorado
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2007 - 12:08am PT
|
Oli and I are getting laptops w/ IM software so we can Troll the sh*t out of this place!
Tar, dude - LMAO! man, way good.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2007 - 12:10am PT
|
...Cuz Lois also moves to ramble so.
|
|
Raydog
Trad climber
Boulder Colorado
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2007 - 12:17am PT
|
I'm getting my material together for a new thread called
"Injury to the Webmaster"
it's gonna rock!
|
|
Crimpergirl
Social climber
St. Looney
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2007 - 12:23am PT
|
I was sitting in a restaurant at a table with about 8 others when someone did actually start drooling (small warning) then vomited all over the table. What did we do? We jumped out of the way, renamed our friend (Big Blow Joe), then laughed and laughed and laughed. Of course, everyone was hammered.
It was a funny moment, but it wouldn't be so funny if it happened every meal for sure.
|
|
Raydog
Trad climber
Boulder Colorado
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2007 - 12:26am PT
|
it's a cookie
|
|
Oli
Trad climber
Fruita, Colorado
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 20, 2007 - 01:55am PT
|
Ok, Werner, you win. I have only answered those who keep telling me I am weak and cowardly and need to put up with the green vomit and who insist I must drive with a windshield full of bug juice, and get over myself, etc. But a last question, Melissa, since when did anyone have to "determine" who the ants were, or what an ant is? Either it's an ant or it isn't. I think even an ant might know it's an ant. But I'll shut up, rather than look like a troll. Nice way of censoring me. Insult me right out of there. You gotta dig it, all you anti-censor insects.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2007 - 02:02am PT
|
Nothing wrong with "Trolling" as long as you do it right.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2007 - 02:25am PT
|
I've been trolled?
Shoot: now I feel cheap, a little dirty even.
I'm going to bed now and get up and take another run at it tomorrow...
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
The West
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2007 - 02:35am PT
|
Nice analysis Roy.
Personally, though it often has it's down side, I like being down here in the mosh pit with the puking babies.
"Out of chaos comes order."
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!