MetaChat REGISTER   ||   LOGIN   ||   IMAGES ARE OFF   ||   RECENT COMMENTS




artphoto by splunge
artphoto by TheophileEscargot
artphoto by Kronos_to_Earth
artphoto by ethylene

Home

About

Search

Archives

Mecha Wiki

Metachat Eye

Emcee

IRC Channels

IRC FAQ


 RSS


Comment Feed:

RSS

07 April 2008

Flamus Interruptus; Or, Where The Hell Did That Meteorite Come From? In which I mutter darkly about matters trivial and Internetty.[More:]

So I was puttering around on a certain Web 2.0 books and social networking site that rhymes with "Gelfari", when a young punk with an irritatingly wacky username posted a mildly rude comment on my homepage.

"Right," I thought. "He wants a flamewar, he's getting a flamewar. And he's getting into one with a grizzled, battle-hardened veteran of well over a decade's flaming across the wide and wild Internet."

The comment was only 42 minutes old, so clearly I had to wait: too prompt a response and it looks like you care. So across the gulf of continents, slowly and surely I drew my plans against him.

Young, so vulnerable to a patronizing tone. Wants to be in the right, so vulnerable to facts. I opened up calculator and got a few numbers: nothing like numbers to add a vicious stink of brimstone to a flame. He wanted facts, so maybe a tinyurl link: possibly goatse, possibly lemonparty, maybe just to Seanyboy's diabolical uber-rickroll.

When the time was right I logged, on ready for action, and found--

--and found, the little git's only gone and apologised! I can't flame him at all now or I look like an asshole.

That was the third worst thing: total case of blue mouse-balls.

Then, I had to go and post a grudgingly conciliatory reply. One reply led to another, and somehow-- somehow he's now on my friends list. Yes, he's officially my friend: it's right there in pastel on a curvy-edged backround.

That was the second worst thing.

The worst thing was realizing that I'd got my clichés completely wrong. I'm not a battle-hardened veteran anymore. Now, I'm a lumbering, scaly, Web 1.0 dinosaur; helplessly blundering around around Web 2.0 world, roaring in vain at the fluffy Web 2.0 mammals scampering nimbly away from my feet.

The End.
LOL.

I think the internet's going through a bit of a Renaissance. Time was when you could know everything there was to know on the internet. Not any more. Increased information flow means that people have to specialise. Ignorance is a commonality & with this increased ignorance comes the social tools people need to admit they're wrong.

Plus, anonymity on the internet is slowly receding. It makes a lot less sense to be an anonymous fuckwad when you're no longer anonymous.
posted by seanyboy 07 April | 06:24
Ha you silly old bugger!

*waits 40-odd minutes to apologize*
posted by gomichild 07 April | 06:39
It's definitely changing.

There a nice sites around where people are nice too each other. And there are flamey sites, but it's more or less a pure exchange of rapid insults like you get on YouTube or The Sun. If you accused them of ad hominem they'd think you were calling them gay.

The middle ground where you could insult people and systematically dismantle their beliefs in an organized manner is shrinking away.
posted by TheophileEscargot 07 April | 06:39
Thank you for that Monday Morning smile, Theo. :D
posted by chewatadistance 07 April | 07:14
That was an excellent story.

I've been thinking recently about the "you're wrong, no you're wrong"-style flamewar, too. It is becoming a thing of the past, and it does sound hoary when people play that way.

Lately I've been appreciating most the kinds of responses that, instead of flat-out aggressively dismantling a point of view and crunching it to tiny little peices beneath the heel of contemptuous argumentation, just completely elevates and re-frames the discussion.

One of the pieces of wisdom adulthood is bringing me is the realization that everything is more complicated than it seems. More nuanced. Less right vs. wrong. I'm starting to focus a lot more on practical solutions and localized answers than on idealogical questions. From " X is wrong, you ignorant slut" to "X exists. The implications of X are such-and-so. Advocacy Group is working to change X. Here are the actions you can take if you oppose X. Here are some resources for further reading about X."

I do think it's still a good thing to call out blatant errors of rhetoric or reason, and certainly bullshit and ad hominems and straw men and so forth. Having that happen to me helped me think a lot more clearly and develop arguments better. It also allows you to get to the meat of the difference of opinion more quickly. But recently the line dividing "productive argument" from "vindictive, ego-inflating flamewar" has become much more clear. I try not to waste time on unproductive arguments any more.
posted by Miko 07 April | 10:03
Yosemite Wedding Report! || Magical Mystery Tour. as performed by YNGWIE FUCKING MALMSTEEN!

HOME  ||   REGISTER  ||   LOGIN