| Lachlan Brown on Sun, 24 Mar 2002 00:54:02 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| [Nettime-bold] Re: [AIR-L] Not Only in Kansas anymore and well on the way to Salem |
Part 2 AIR intervention. from March 16 2002 to present. [to be edited, with comments in progress] > > This is the March 16 - 22 part of a six week intervention into the Association of Internet Researchers discussion list at http://www.aoir.org > > > > 1. The horizons of academic inquiry and > their economies. Lachlan Brown queries > the discourse that governs the management > and the discussion of the List of the (American) Association of Internet Researchers. > > > [Air-l] Researching over the line/horizon? - the great forgetting? > Lachlan Brown air-l@aoir.org > Sat, 16 Mar 2002 20:41:52 -0500 > > Calm down, calm down. > > Offensive academic inquiry? What a novel idea. > Stepping over the 'line'? Since when has academic > inquiry been required to remain within known bounds? > > Address the questions! > > [perhaps I should have edited the 'lonely-heart seeks > similar' section from my CV...it is better to give love > than to constantly seek it] > > The Air-L already has a set of protocols: academic > and IT related. I can assure you that the bounds of > permitted discourse are very highly policed. I have > already skirmished a number of times with the forces > of moderation. It is significant that these forces pretend > not to exist in this capacity. I have already received one > hint of litigation. Great stuff. A hint that, invoking the > discourse of the legal profession if I may briefly digress, > has no grounds and on the contrary leaves he who hinted > open to similar. > > I think the question to be addressed regarding the range > of permissible questions and the acceptability of approach > is whether this policing is to be derived from an academic > discourse, or whether a 'set of rules' developed contingent > to the emergence of online communication aided by a > technology of distributed computing within highly > specialized conditions and communities > is to prevail over this discussion and inquiry. > > The point is not a minor one. This, it appears, is a list > representing the state of academic inquiry into Internet. > The state of academic inquiry has been questioned. By me. > Regardless of method, regardless of offence, regardless > of reaction, notwithstanding any breach to ‘good sense and > sound reason’, and certainly without deference of 'polite > society'. People in industry, government, and in the general public > look to this Association to provide meaningful information > to help to inform them in their respective fields and duties. > The production of wealth, governance, the sharing in our > common well-being. > > I would prefer that an academic discourse which here, it > seems, going by the mandate of AoIR, is the discourse of > the study of culture, is privileged over an IT related 'discourse' > dependant upon a 'nettiquette'. > > The reason is this: there are significant gaps, oversights > and repressions in research into Internet. The responsibility of an > academic research community, of which this list is a part, is > to consider a range of modes of approach and lines of > inquiry so that questions that may have been overlooked > may be identified, so that resources may be allocated and > applied to their research and study. > > An academic community, of which this list is part, has a > responsibility to broader society to inform and to educate. > It is in a dialogue with this broader culture, it is in a contractual > relationship with the society formed of this dialogue, the social > contract. > > I am all for rules. Believe me I am far from Anarchy on the > question of intellectual inquiry. However, I believe the list already > has a sets of rules, rules laid down during centuries of academic > and scholarly inquiry and rules set out to promote inquiry where > there is none. > > Ignore these rules at your very, very great peril. > > The Association of Internet Researchers has, it seems, chosen a > cultural studies mandate. This mandate promotes inter-disciplinarity, > that is it requires of us, whatever our specialism, and whatever our > ideological position on the question of whether qualitative or > quantitive methods of analysis provide greatest purchase in the > age-long quest for knowledge [for the grail, no less], to be open > to ideas, opinions and to research approaches. > > > Again, this inter-disciplinarity is to a purpose. > With regard to the rules of academic inquiry: > I propose that the discourse, the modes of approach and > the means of critical analysis of cultural studies prevail > here. The reason is that this inter-disciplinarity of cultural > studies, far from being an innovative approach as it is often > assumed to be, speaks to broader society. This speaking to, > or dialogue with, broader society, church, state, commerce is > not particularly a new idea. It first appeared in its familiar form > in a directive of the Fourth Lateran Council: an instruction > that the 'leered teeche the lewd', in their own language, all > methods and means considered, without undue deference to > the authority of Latin, or the authority of the Church at that time, > or to put it plainly: the educated have a responsibility to inform > the uneducated in all matters. The european adaptation of the Islamic > model of the University, and much beside, was an outcome > of this welcome innovation in culture. The College of the Sorbonne > was I think the first University – an idea that spread. > > Are we now to embark upon a great forgetting of the work that > brought us to this place? For the sake of ‘nettiquette’ whatever that is? > Simply to make things easier for the world of 'information technology', > information and knowledge management and administration, and > computing? I think not. > > > > I am considered provocative in my approach. This is a curious > word and it is true that I did once say to Nikolas Rose, a > Professor at Goldsmiths College that my web publication > 'difference engine' was provocative, but this was in the context > of the very early days of WWW (Jan 1996) and the purpose was > to discover the points where the host server and the host institution > correlated, and where they did not. By provoking, one found out > where boundaries lay, and one found out where there were none. > > I do not think my research approach here is provocative at all. I think that by teasing out, by any means, by all means, questions, questions that produce questions I am doing > an academic and scholarly duty. > > Now, where's my stipend, bursary, budget? > > Lachlan Brown > > ------------ > > 2. Sex, Gender, Role Play. Commercial Websites. Research? > > > > [Air-l] susan? > Lachlan Brown air-l@aoir.org > Sat, 16 Mar 2002 20:53:48 -0500 > > > susan? right. > > I have used email long enought to know when > a false name is being used and when > a bogus point of research is being raised > in a false identity. I had that a lot. You > can 'read the grain' of the email. If > you know people's writing you know their > email. > > The rules might forbid such shennanigans? > There are plenty of opportunities for > identity play elsewhere. > > I wonder, is there any research on > Lightspeed University? > > [Lightspeed University is a commercial 'cheerleader' site.] > > > Lachlan > > > 3. Editing out identity and the body in 'cyberspace'. > Mary Grey is a moderator of a bi-fem usenet > alt.sex group > > > [Air-l] What? > Lachlan Brown air-l@aoir.org > Sat, 16 Mar 2002 21:12:17 -0500 > > > Re: MLGrey ucsd > > > I am raising questions to excite response. > You edited: > > >...I mean, identity and > > bodies kind of matter don't you think?]. > > from my mail. > > Lachlan > -- > > > 4. The Tragedy of the Commons/Tragedy of Capital? Questioning the basis of the American > Ideology. > > > [Air-l] The Commons > Lachlan Brown air-l@aoir.org > Sat, 16 Mar 2002 21:27:22 -0500 > > > > The model of 'the commons' I am presently > researching (an action research - getting > back to the Real after resarching the Real and the Net) is an industrial commons > with a number of needy people competing > over limited resources that fluctuate over > time. Its a relatively closed system with > landlord and contracted agents, as well as police and courts (tresspass law) impacting > upon it. > > It is not a study of the impact of social > relations on ecology, though ecology does > impact the system. It is winter and this is > an open air context. > > Yes, I find no tragedy occurs. Very little > strife among the competitors, all under > high stress within the system under study. > > The model can be reproduced. I mean you could > undertake the study next winter. > > Lachlan > > -- > > 5. Invoking History and the Archive (US Library of Congress), and the Matrix. > > > > Air-l] for Mary > Lachlan Brown air-l@aoir.org > Sat, 16 Mar 2002 21:47:35 -0500 > > > My first html. I put cyberfeminism on the WWW: > > > http://web.archive.org/web/19970515012200/www.gold.ac.uk/difference/ang.html > > Lachlan > > PS. I do not use UseNet. > > > > 6. A response on Research Gaps. > > [Air-l] research gaps > Mark Andrejevic air-l@aoir.org > Sun, 17 Mar 2002 14:11:39 -0500 (EST) > > Although I have yet to fathom precisely which > gaps/repressions/oversights in Internet research Lachlan seeks to > rectify, and while I find the offensive part of his contribution to be > not particularly academic in nature, and the academic part to be not > particularly offensive, the question of research emphasis remains an > intriguing one (and one that I know is of great concern to AoIR folks, > independent of any provocation/intervention). > > > 7. Is Lachlan for Real? > > > [Air-l] Identiy and Internet > John White air-l@aoir.org > Sun, 17 Mar 2002 16:42:48 -0600 > > All, > > The recent threads regarding moderation, posting, etc., started with a > post by Susan about Lachlan's intervention. The part that struck me > was the bit about going "to the Goldsmiths College" website to find > information about Lachlan. This triggered something else we had > talked about before, namely identity and online realities. This was a > very practical example, imho, [in my humble opinion] of not separate existence, but existence > at all, being challenged because of a lack of documentation online. > > > > 8. Dreamtime: 'Lachlan Brown' is an Imaginary Nordic Beast > > > > [Air-l] Trolling > Susan Herring air-l@aoir.org > Sun, 17 Mar 2002 18:04:25 -0600 (CST) > > > > Fellow Internet researchers, > > Lachlan Brown is a troll. > > The solution to how to deal with a troll's disruptive effects is > not simple -- both ignoring him and restricting his access via > moderation or other means have their drawbacks. If anyone is > interested, I've just co-authored a paper analyzing a case of > trolling that bears similarities to the one currently taking > place on this list. It's under review for publication, but I'd > be happy to send a pre-publication copy to anyone who emails > me. > > Best, > > Susan Herring > > > 9. 'Lachlan Brown' Pathologized - Lewisham rallies to the rights of Lachlan Brown > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mary L. Gray" <mgray@weber.ucsd.edu> > To: <air-l@aoir.org> > Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 5:14 AM > Subject: Re: [Air-l] Identity and Internet > > > > ** i'd have to say i think susan's search of the Goldsmith College > webpages > > seems more a case of questioning or challenging legitimacy (and by > extension > > one's 'right' to a voice in this forum)...although i could see where this > > could lead to a revoking of 'existence' in this forum. > > > > work environments are by no means absent of sexually charged power > dynamics > > or our sexualities. so, i'm not sure why i expect to see a request for > pics > > in a dating chat room or on a matchmaker website, but wasn't prepared to > see > > it on the AIR list. why is that? i'm (sort of) prepared to see/deal with > > these dynamics in the classroom or at a departmental meeting, and i > suppose > > i'm now watching AIR-L figure out how to deal with these dynamics > > online--which so far has come across as 'filter it out/ignore it'...a less > > than satisfying response to a complicated situation. > > > Hi Mary, > > I am baffled that you don't see the link between these two events you > describe. > > Susan challenges Lachlan's legitimacy, questions his right to have a voice > on this forum, with a clever allusion to his absence from the website of the > college where he claims to be based. I don't know about sexually charged, > but wouldn't you say this is a fairly clear manifestation of power dynamics? > CV's at dawn. > > Lachlan, in reply, alludes to the personal attack/power play hidden within > this challenge in his caricature of another, less subtle form of intrusive > personal attack/power play, at the same time changing the discourse to > include personal detail as well as listing his academic background. I > thought actually that was as much trying to be real, personal, as > retaliating in kind. > > And anyway, isn't that really the objection to Lachlan? So far as I can > see, folk simply don't like his style of contributions. He just doesn't use > the right language, adopt the right (academic) 'voice' and often appears to > be having a conversation with himself. He talks personally rather than > academically. > > I think the fact that I usually can't be bothered to get into what he's > saying says as much about me as it does about him. On occasions when I can > be bothered, I find his contributions quite intruiging. > > I really enjoyed reading John's and Denise's postings about Identity and the > Internet, and Mark's postings today about research gaps - seems a much more > useful pursuit to springboard from all this into subjects that are relevant > to the list, than focusing all this energy into labelling someone a troll > and trying to eradicate them, bacause we don't like their style of > engagement. > > Although I guess that labelling/pathologising styles of Internet engagement > is also a legitimate interest on this list, even if I don't like it myself. > > This post of course reflects my own bias - as a practitioner in the mental > health field, I get very hot under the collar when I see people damaged by > the process of being labelled and pathologised by groups, groups who are > often actually doing no more than trying to silence and deny the experience, > often of domination and abuse, for which such people are trying to find > expression. > > Ben > > [Ben Devidson lives in S.E. London. I have bantered with him about familiar local pubs there. Local knowledge.] > > > 10Lachlan's identity and methodology tried. > > [Air-l] Identity and Internet > Mary L. Gray air-l@aoir.org > Sun, 17 Mar 2002 21:14:08 -0800 > > > hi all : ) > > interesting points, john. > > you wrote: > <SNIP> > > This [susan looking into lachlan's credentials on the Goldsmith College > website] was a > > very practical example, imho, of not separate existence, but existence > > at all, being challenged because of a lack of documentation online. > > ** i'd have to say i think susan's search of the Goldsmith College webpages > seems more a case of questioning or challenging legitimacy (and by extension > one's 'right' to a voice in this forum)...although i could see where this > could lead to a revoking of 'existence' in this forum. > > and further down you ask: > > > Do these > > electronic records [online CVs], incomplete as they are, constitute my > professional > > identity? > > ** great question...i think these documents do constitute _part_ of our > professional identities...as do published articles, posts to professional > mailing lists, delivered (or cancelled) conference papers, letters of > recommendation, etc. these are all part of the paper trail the performance > of our professional careers leaves behind. but, i'm not sure electronic > records really do anything qualitatively different or special beyond > supplying an added venue for producing/reflecting our professional > identities..which seems again, more about adding legitimacy to our > identities than proving that we exist as professionals. > > i'm wondering what conditions lead to these online documents carrying more > or less weight in different contexts? if susan had found that indeed lachlan > was a grad student listed (with high honors) on the Goldsmith College > website, would his posting of a mock personal ad and request from susan for > any 'pics' been less (or more) jarring? > > [I reference pics to highlight the male gaze. My 'personal ad' was intended to > tease out a reaction from feminism.' The reference to Russian women was out of respect > for what I read as responses in Nettime Bold from NN] > > work environments are by no means absent of sexually charged power dynamics > or our sexualities. so, i'm not sure why i expect to see a request for pics > in a dating chat room or on a matchmaker website, but wasn't prepared to see > it on the AIR list. why is that? i'm (sort of) prepared to see/deal with > these dynamics in the classroom or at a departmental meeting, and i suppose > i'm now watching AIR-L figure out how to deal with these dynamics > online--which so far has come across as 'filter it out/ignore it'...a less > than satisfying response to a complicated situation. > > best, > marygray > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Mary L. Gray <mlgray@ucsd.edu> > Department of Communication > University of California, San Diego > mail: PO Box 4004, Louisville, KY 40204 > http://weber.ucsd.edu/~mgray > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > 11. The Core Question emerges in definition: > Human Geography plus Information technology > in the context of an exploration of sexuality. > > [Air-l] rurality and CMC > Mary L. Gray air-l@aoir.org > Sun, 17 Mar 2002 21:24:21 -0800 > > > > hello folks, > > as long as i've been posting up a storm (for me anyhow), i thought i might > ask if anyone's been thinking about or knows work on rethinking U.S. > non-urban or rural spaces in relation to CMC? how has the notion of rurality > been affected by access and lack of access to the Net? are people in rural > sociology or other disciplines thinking about rurality differently because > of these technologies? > > i'm guessing there's some pile of literature out there i just haven't run > across yet (but, it's right under my nose, yes?) > > any thoughts/cites would be much appreciated. > > best, > marygray > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Mary L. Gray <mlgray@ucsd.edu> > Department of Communication > University of California, San Diego > mail: PO Box 4004, Louisville, KY 40204 > http://weber.ucsd.edu/~mgray > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > 12. Lachlan Brown's status as a Victim 'I do cultural studies, anyone got a problem with that?' queried. > > [Air-l] victimization rhetoric and the real victims > Christian Nelson air-l@aoir.org > Mon, 18 Mar 2002 10:16:34 -0500 > > > Ben Davidson wrote: > > > This post of course reflects my own bias - as a practitioner in the mental > > health field, I get very hot under the collar when I see people damaged by the > > process of being labelled and pathologised by groups, groups who are often > > actually doing no more than trying to silence and deny the experience, often > > of domination and abuse, for which such people are trying to find expression. > > Since I implicitly "pathologized" someone participating on the list, I feel a > need to respond to this. I agree that it is wrong to label and pathologize > victims of domination and abuse, and I'd agree that one can legitimately engage > in the politics of the personal when one is a victim of domination and abuse. > But the party in question--and there is a party in question--this is not a > hypothetical discussion, or a general one, is no victim of domination and abuse. > Sure, he identified himself as such in his introduction--i.e., he implied that > his status as a cultural studies scholar had made him a target of abuse. But > that now strikes me as having been nothing more than a clever ploy for > legitimating the politics of the personal--a politics that is otherwise > illegitimate here, for he was not victimized by anyone on this list previous to > his original construction of himself as a victim. (His characterizations of > other folks' attempts to defend themselves as attempts at victimization--e.g., > his suggestion that Jeremy was victimizing him by threatening to use his > *private* E-mail filtering, are equally clever but no more legitimate.) Clever > rhetoric should not mask the fact that we have not only witnessed a great lack > of collegiality where that lack was not required, but that we have witnessed > sexual harassment, at least as that would be defined in the US. True, the air-l > list *may* not constitute a workplace environment as that is defined in US law > on sexual harassment, and so the sexual harassment *may* not be prosecutable in > the US. But such behavior still deserves and needs to be labeled and > pathologized. > > Best, > Christian Nelson > > > 13. Lachlan Brown assumes the role of the teacher. Chellenges moderation and the aims of AoIR. > > [air-l] busy as bees > Lachlan Brown air-l@aoir.org > Mon, 18 Mar 2002 13:58:35 -0500 > > > a. > > Well, my word, things are buzzing arn't they? > > I see my 'provocation' which I was quick to point out to Mary was an inappropriate term > in this necessary work - I prefer 'tease out', 'excite', even 'demand' where necessary, > reaction and response to some very necessary > questions - has had some effect. > You've all been busy talking among yourselves > and forming groups. Great ideas. Carry on. I'll take a look at what you've come up with > and get back to you. > > Susan? I think one of the lads has been playing a little trick? You know who you are. > > I see one member asked whether there were > other lists like AoIR. No, Jason there are not. Jeremy, you seem to have taken on the > role of 'bouncer' in this setting, could > you lock the door to make sure that no-one escapes? But please at the same > time prepare to admit new members. There > may be a few coming along shortly. > > I've been in touch with some friends about > developing an 8 credit course along > transition education and community education > lines for those among you unfamiliar with > the history, development and contemporary > direction of the subjects of cultural studies. > > I'll let you all know how this goes. > > Best > > Lachlan Brown > Cultural Studies > Goldsmiths College > -- > > b. > > > [Air-l] Now, that's enough of that. > Lachlan Brown air-l@aoir.org > Mon, 18 Mar 2002 14:13:13 -0500 > > > > >Lachlan Brown is a troll. > > Hmmm... I prefer 'Othered Proletarian' > myself, but I suppose its all a question > of which is the meta-dscourse here: the > discourse of 'self-regulation' applied to > the running of Internet and of the > Information Technology sector > in education and in world of commercial > Intenret services, or whether the cultural > and social implications of these practices, taking into account their impacts predominate. > > > c. > > [Air-l] Sexism? > Lachlan Brown air-l@aoir.org > Mon, 18 Mar 2002 14:43:53 -0500 > > > > I thought the attack was against homophobia, not sexism. I assumed 'susan' was a male. I > did so because it is rare, in my experience, for an academic to write on a first name > basis and without the 'coordinates' of position and institution. > > Lachlan Brown > > > > >>When someone accuses another person of homophobia, let alone the rest, the someone > has to let the person reply. > I am not homophobic, on the contrary I > suffered for a solidarity with a number > of gay people in seeing John Greyson's book > Queer Looks through to print. I have > never been called homophobic and its a > little hurtful. > > Though I recognise that in my method in > teasing out reaction I brought it upon myself. > > Lachlan > > > > > Lachlan, i'm not a huge fan of filtering mail and pretending not to hear > > someone, so let me say directly: i can't see much value in exchanging with > > you. so, i'd ask you not to bother "raising questions [with me] to excite > > response"...i'm plum not interested in the conversation. > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > Mary L. Gray <mlgray@ucsd.edu> > > Department of Communication > > University of California, San Diego > > mail: PO Box 4004, Louisville, KY 40204 > > http://weber.ucsd.edu/~mgray > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > > From: "Lachlan Brown" <lachlan@london.com> > > > Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 21:12:17 -0500 > > > To: mlgray@ucsd.edu > > > Cc: air-l@aoir.org > > > Subject: What? > > > > > > Re: MLGrey ucsd > > > > > > > > > I am raising questions to excite response. > > > You edited: > > > > > >> ...I mean, identity and > > >> bodies kind of matter don't you think?]. > > > > > > from my mail. > > > > > > Lachlan > > > -- > > > > > > [I referenced bodies and identities in the context of bi-fem exploration of youth sexuality, I was about to query research into root access, ghosting web cam chat, and image capture technologies. - Where's the research?????] > > UNSUBSCRIBED > Tried to mail: > > 1. On Lessaiz FaireModeration - Steve Jones > > Based on today's e-mails from him, and earlier ones, I have had > Lachlan Brown's e-mail addresses removed from the air-l list. He will > not be able to post to air-l from those addresses. Furthermore, air-l > is now open to subscribers only, and subscriptions will be moderated > by the air-l administrators. A comprehensive posting policy is > forthcoming (hopefully in the next day or two), but in the meantime > due to the personal, inappropriate and harassing nature of his recent > posts I've decided to remove Lachlan from the list at this time. > > Thanks you, > Sj > > > > > > 2. The New Rules New Guidelines Developed and posted. > > > 3. Ding Dong the Wicked Witch is Dead > > > [Air-l] Lachlan Brown has been unsubscribed from air-l > T Kennedy air-l@aoir.org > Mon, 18 Mar 2002 20:55:00 -0500 > > > > Ding Dong the witch is dead! > > Thanks ! Looking forward to getting back on track... > T. Kennedy > > Subject: [Air-l] Lachlan Brown has been unsubscribed from air-l > > > 3. A lone voice speaks up, tentatively. > > [Air-l] Lachlan Brown > robert m. tynes air-l@aoir.org > Wed, 20 Mar 2002 16:49:40 -0800 (PST) > > I find it a bit troubling. I'm not sure exactly why, but I do have a few > reflections. > > Although I conceptually understand why Lachlan was booted, I don't feel > comfortable with the decision. Maybe it appeared to swift, which, I know, > is probably just my vantage point as a list member. (I've heard tell that > Lachlan was warned off-list to settle down. And, he was openly admonished > for making sexist statements and personal attacks, and for posting > off-list e-mails. Nasty deeds, to be sure.) > > Maybe I would have felt better if he was warned publicly - on-list - so > that it was obvious what might happen. There was no public debate about > whether he should be yanked or not. The rule was "handed down". Now, I > know this may sound like an attack on the powers above: it is not. All I'm > saying is that now I know that there is power above. > > But that's not really the problematic part for me. Rather, I find it odd > that Lachlan gets removed from the list for inflammatory postings and > personal attacks, and yet there are no apparent repercussions for trashing him > publicly, i.e. he's a *troll* and a *witch*. Is that fair? As scholars of > social phenomenon, shouldn't we be a tad more aware of the social > construction of online reality and our contribution to, and > institutionalization of, deviance. Is Lachlan so awful that he deserves to > becomes AOIR's subaltern Other? > > My e-mail is not meant to defend Lachlan (what would be the point of that, > right?). I'm merely curious about what our meta-discourse is, and how we > are governing it. > > -Robert Tynes > > 4. Net Nordic Folklore invoked to reassert the > predominant discourse governing the discussion. > > > [Air-l] Lachlan Brown > Blanchard, Anita L air-l@aoir.org > Wed, 20 Mar 2002 20:30:24 -0500 > > A note about the word troll: > > A "troll" is a term used by virtual community users to describe someone who > comes into a group and tries to stir things up by posting outrageous > comments about the topic of the group, attacking group members and thus > becoming the object of ire by the group. I learned of this term from > interviewing participants of an athletic newsgroup/virtual community. They > had several trolls (really and truly called trolls) who would post comments > such as "women should not compete in sports"--clearly a comment made to draw > attention, albeit negative. from the group. > > I am not sorry that our first troll is gone. I don't mind moderation: on > ISWorld we recieve messages a few times a day as the moderators read and > approve them. I like knowing that i'm now in "ISWorld mode" and will > receive their emails. Of course, I am not a very active poster, and others > may have different views about the moderation thing. > > I do think the whole idea of "trolling" is fascinating. Why do they do what > they do? Why go into a group to rile folks up?! Although I could not > interview my research group's troll (I asked, he would not firmly committ), > I have talked with someone I know FtF about why he trolled a christian > newsgroup: he said he thought he was doing the group a favor by making them > think. I think there's quite a bit more to it than that. > > Anybody interested in a troll study?!?! > > Anita > > Anita Blanchard, Ph.D. > Dept of Psychology > UNC Charlotte > Charlotte, NC 28221 > 704.687.4847 > > > 3. Unease in Oz. > > > [Air-l] Lachlan Brown > Monika Merkes air-l@aoir.org > Thu, 21 Mar 2002 13:01:45 +1100 > > > I share Robert's feelings of unease mainly for two reasons: freedom of > speech is more important to me than being exposed to some inappropriate > or even offensive comments, and secondly issues around process: what > _is_ the process for being kicked off the list? Is it a fair and > transparent process? > Regards > Monika > > Monika Merkes > http://member.melbpc.org.au/~monika/ > > "robert m. tynes" wrote: > > > > I find it a bit troubling. I'm not sure exactly why, but I do have a few > > reflections. > > > <snip> > > > 4. Tolkien vs the social contract? 'Lachlan's assertion was wrong. A moderator > elaborates on the meanings of the word Troll > and Trolling in virtual community. > > [Air-l] Lachlan Brown > jeremy hunsinger air-l@aoir.org > Wed, 20 Mar 2002 22:06:33 -0500 > > > > troll from the jargon file: > troll > > 1. v.,n. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting > on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames; or, the > post itself. Derives from the phrase "trolling for newbies" which in > turn comes from mainstream "trolling", a style of fishing in which one > trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. The > well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and > flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they already do, > while subtly conveying to the more savvy and experienced that it is in > fact a deliberate troll. If you don't fall for the joke, you get to be > in on it. See also YHBT. 2. n. An individual who chronically trolls in > sense 1; regularly posts specious arguments, flames or personal attacks > to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in email for no other purpose than > to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion. Trolls are recognizable by the > fact that they have no real interest in learning about the topic at > hand - they simply want to utter flame bait. Like the ugly creatures > they are named after, they exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as > such, they are recognized as a lower form of life on the net, as in, > "Oh, ignore him, he's just a troll." Compare kook. 3. n. [Berkeley] > Computer lab monitor. A popular campus job for CS students. Duties > include helping newbies and ensuring that lab policies are followed. > Probably so-called because it involves lurking in dark cavelike corners. > > Some people claim that the troll (sense 1) is properly a narrower > category than flame bait, that a troll is categorized by containing some > assertion that is wrong but not overtly controversial. See also > Troll-O-Meter. > > The use of `troll' in either sense is a live metaphor that readily > produces elaborations and combining forms. For example, one not > infrequently sees the warning "Do not feed the troll" as part of a > followup to troll postings. > On Wednesday, March 20, 2002, at 08:30 PM, Blanchard, Anita L wrote: > ---def.--over-- > > for me, to troll is in one significant sense, one trolls for opinions, > one trolls for the uninformed, one trolls to get people to voice things > that are inappropriate in a venue. in some respects lachlan was > trolling, he was trying to generate responses, but in another perhaps he > was not. to troll, in the stricktest usenet sense, is to 'troll for > newbies', one posts a comment that would raise the ire of anyone, but > most people know to ignore it, except those people who have not been > around. There are several classic trolls relating to a wide variety of > topics, usually all are constrained along boundaries of power of some > sort, and are constructed along societal lines, stereotypes are > excellent troll fodder. > > > > ] > > > jeremy hunsinger > jhuns@vt.edu > on the ibook > www.cddc.vt.edu > www.cddc.vt.edu/jeremy > www.dromocracy.com > > The legal argument > > [Air-l] Lachlan Brown > Dean Rehberger air-l@aoir.org > Wed, 20 Mar 2002 22:25:39 -0500 > > > > As we think about the actions of online communities, it is always good to > keep a few things in mind. First, lists are run by institutions and they > can be held responsible for the actions of list members (harassment and > such) [where is/was harassment?] . So while we can hold up the ideal of free speech, list owners are > the ones often taking the legal risks and should be allowed latitude to act > to protect the list and themselves. > > Second, I often find it strange that we hold up free speech but we are all > held to codes of conduct (sometimes written and sometimes unspoken) when > teaching and speaking in public-we don't harass or insult our students or > audience members but act in ways to develop a community. > > Three, "troll" is a well established term like "flame" in online communities > and has a long history. Perhaps to say Brown is a troll is somewhat > improper, but to say he exhibits the traditional qualities of a troll would > be dead on. > > Four, while free speech is important, we all know - and often groan - that > we work under many limits when doing experiments on human subjects. Brown's > announced enterprise to experiment on the list violates the very base of > academic freedom--we do have a right to not to be subjects of research. > > As Stanley Fish says (something like), there is no such thing as free speech > and it is a damn good thing. So it goes. An interesting and important > topic for our work. > > Dean Rehberger > Associate Director of Matrix > Associate Professor > Michigan State University > 310 Auditorium > East Lansing, MI 48824-1120 > rehberger@mail.matrix.msu.edu > matrix.msu.edu/rehberger > wk: (517) 355-9300 > fax: (517) 355-8363 > hm: (517) 347-7372 > > > > Troll as Id. > > > [Air-l] Troll > robert m. tynes air-l@aoir.org > Wed, 20 Mar 2002 20:22:20 -0800 (PST) > > > > Yes, I know that *troll* is Net lingo. > > When used to describe someone directly, I think that most people would > deem the term *derogatory*, and not *endearing*. Although, in > Seattle, we have a statuesque troll living underneath a bridge and it's pretty cool. It's > kind of Billy Goat gruff-ish without the threat of blood, bones, and gore. > > -Robert > What is the dominant discourse governing AoIR? > > [Air-l] Lachlan Brown & Free Speech > robert m. tynes air-l@aoir.org > Wed, 20 Mar 2002 20:30:31 -0800 (PST) > > > My points concerning Lachlan had nothing to do with Freedom of Speech. I > am more interested in the underlying discourse that many members of the > list assume we all agree upon. But what is that common discourse? I have > no idea. But I'm curious to find out. Obviously, for some of us, it might > involve the concept of Free Speech. For others, the discourse might be > about language games. For others, it might be about unencumbered > scholarship. > > Jameson might say, language is a prison-house, especially on-line. > > What is it on aoir? > > -Robert > > > > Learning from Lachlan > > [Air-l] Learning from Lachlan > Michael Gurstein air-l@aoir.org > Thu, 21 Mar 2002 07:54:46 -0500 > > > In the spirit of learning and benefiting from one's experiences (and I > should say, I agree with the decision of the list managers to unsub Lachlan > since his intent was clearly to disrupt rather than interact/communicate), I > think it might be useful to think a little about what one can learn from the > experience with Lachlan and particularly how the list as a collectivity > could benefit from that experience. > > Lachlan for me at first was a breath of fresh air (AoIR) in that he wrote in > a conversational style, he addressed subjects/ideas and people directly, and > he broadened the range of subject areas in what I would consider a useful > way--all of these moving the list out of the rather narrow confines of the > graduate seminar room into the more hurly burly environment of the Net (or > at least what the Net used to be in the days when Usenet rather than the > Shopping Cart was the dominant mode of Internet based interactivity). > > In addition at first he seemed interested in pursuing the discussion around > one or another of these subjects/ideas beyond the simple accumulation of > printed references or URLs into an actual engagement around issues of some > interest and even significance. > > My interest in the Internet is that it has been, is and gives the appearance > of being a profoundly transformative technology. Determining the nature of > that transformation, its boundaries, its impacts and its limitations is for > me a very significant task, both in its own right but also and perhaps most > importantly because this can help us as teachers and as citizens influence > and guide this development in socially meaningful and useful ways. > > To be useful in those areas, as "Internet Researchers" we must I think, be > open to the broadest range of ideas (and not rush too soon to closure around > what is meaningful or valuable) and we must be willing and able to use the > full capacity of the Net to sustain and enable meaningful interactions > across wide distances both physical and social. > > Mike Gurstein > > Michael Gurstein, Ph.D. > (Visiting) Professor: School of Management > New Jersey Institute of Technology > Newark, NJ > > > --On Thursday, March 21, 2002 7:54 AM -0500 Michael Gurstein > <mgurst@vcn.bc.ca> wrote: > > > Lachlan for me at first was a breath of fresh air (AoIR) in that he > > wrote in a conversational style, he addressed subjects/ideas and > > people directly, and he broadened the range of subject areas in > > what I would consider a useful way--all of these moving the list > > out of the rather narrow confines of the graduate seminar room into > > the more hurly burly environment of the Net (or at least what the > > Net used to be in the days when Usenet rather than the Shopping > > Cart was the dominant mode of Internet based interactivity). > > > > In addition at first he seemed interested in pursuing the > > discussion around one or another of these subjects/ideas beyond the > > simple accumulation of printed references or URLs into an actual > > engagement around issues of some interest and even significance. > > For what it's worth, I might note that in the eleven years I've been > responsible for WMST-L (a large academic list for discussion of > women's studies teaching, research, and program administration), I've > seen a number of trolls follow a pattern similar to the one Michael > Gurstein describes. At first, they tend to seem interested, engaged, > sincere. Soon, though, their postings become increasingly off the > wall and disruptive. Eventually, it becomes clear that they're > interested primarily in creating chaos and being the center of > attention. > > I for one am very pleased that Lachlan has been removed from AIR-L. > > Joan > > Joan Korenman, Director > Center for Women & Information Technology > University of Maryland, Baltimore County > Baltimore, MD 21250 USA > korenman@umbc.edu > http://www.umbc.edu/cwit/ > > > [Air-l] Re: Lachlan Brown > Bram Dov Abramson air-l@aoir.org > Thu, 21 Mar 2002 14:30:18 -0500 > > Steve Fox (NLG): > >One thing out of this that I find extremely interesting, though, is how > >the online community governs itself? How does this governance work > >through our collective perceptions of the community, and can online > >communities "survive" without a structured model of governance? > > (1) ... without a structured model of something, anyway. You call it > "governance". Others may like "gardening". > > (2) Whether or not there *is* a structured model of governance depends on > the analyst. Structure is always there, anyway. It's really imho a > question of two things, understanding what structures are going on > (research) and figuring out what structures you want to see going on given > your goals, hopes, ethics (policy). > > unusually prolific (I'll stop now), > Bram > > [Air-l] Re: Learning from Lachlan > Rob Furr air-l@aoir.org > Thu, 21 Mar 2002 14:45:09 -0500 > > Previous message: [Air-l] Re: Learning from Lachlan > Next message: [Air-l] Re: Learning from Lachlan > Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >ps on trolls: Guillaume Latzko-Toth, who I think is still on this list, > >gave an interesting paper at the Lawrence Kansas AIR which (iirc) talked > >about the rise of software-agent trolls inside IRC, much more > >sophisticated than the USENET agent-trolls which I think still roam to and > >fro. A really neat topic for research: what happens when human and > >non-human trolls interact, I wonder? Do they? > > Yup. Kibo and Serdar Argic bumped metaphorical heads more than once, if I > recall correctly.(Assuming you accept the definition of kibo as a troll, > which is arguable either way.) Plus, there's the people who would mention > "turkey" in posts deliberately to trigger Serdar, which would be a human > troll using a bot as its trolling agent. > > Rob Furr > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. Learning from Lachlan: > > I don't share this sense of unease. While I believe that there is room > for scholarly debate in many things, I felt that what Lachlan brought to > the table often fell beyond not only a level of debate, but sometimes a > level of basic understanding.=20 > > One thing out of this that I find extremely interesting, though, is how > the online community governs itself? How does this governance work > through our collective perceptions of the community, and can online > communities "survive" without a structured model of governance? > > Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Monika Merkes [mailto:M.Merkes@latrobe.edu.au]=20 > Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 6:02 PM > To: air-l@aoir.org > Subject: Re: [Air-l] Lachlan Brown > > I share Robert's feelings of unease mainly for two reasons: freedom of > speech is more important to me than being exposed to some inappropriate > or even offensive comments, and secondly issues around process: what > _is_ the process for being kicked off the list? Is it a fair and > transparent process? > Regards > Monika > > Monika Merkes > http://member.melbpc.org.au/~monika/ > > "robert m. tynes" wrote: > >=20 > > I find it a bit troubling. I'm not sure exactly why, but I do have a > few > > reflections. > >=20 > <snip> > > > > 3. The First Ammendment of the Constitution of > the United States of America and 'Lachlan Brown'. > > Thanks to AoIR Exec for writing up the guidelines. > > I wanted to make one point about reference to the US Constitution because there have been a few posts regarding the First Amendment that I found a bit confusing. I'm referring to this section of the guidelines: > > > * While AoIR supports freedom of expression, it does not simply > > do so within the framework of the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment > > or other countries' legal frameworks. AoIR (and particularly air-l) > > The US Constitution First Amendment states the following: > "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." > (quoted from http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html ) > > The focus here is on: _Congress_ shall make no law - so it is the US _Government_ that will not limit freedom of speech. There is no comment here about organizations that are not affiliated with the US Government. In so far as AoIR is not a branch of the US Government, AoIR has every right to set limits on people's expression. > > Given that people do tend to misunderstand this sometimes, I understand why the Exec decided to include that bit in the guidelines. Nonetheless, I thought perhaps it was worth clarifying. > > Eszter > http://www.eszter.com > -- > > [Air-l] Re: Learning from Lachlan > Muraco air-l@aoir.org > Thu, 21 Mar 2002 11:57:29 -0800 > > Previous message: [Air-l] Re: Learning from Lachlan > Next message: [Air-l] Re: Lachlan Brown > Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > we should call this the complain about Lachan list... > another list goes to hell..... > > > [Air-l] Lachlan Brown > Alex Kuskis air-l@aoir.org > Thu, 21 Mar 2002 15:55:12 -0500 > > Previous message: [Air-l] Troll > Next message: [Air-l] riaa hacks back? > Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > A related term is "flame bait", which Netlingo.com defines as: > An intentionally inflammatory posting in a newsgroup or discussion > group designed to elicit a strong reaction thereby creating a flame war. > NetLingo Classification: Online Jargon > Alex > alex.kuskis@utotonto.ca > > > The initial query about the mandate of AoIR > confirming that the governing discourse was a cultural studies discourse, concerned with real world impacts is now buried in the depths of Usenet folklore. The discourse of IT > management of virtual spaces in confirmed. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "jeremy hunsinger" <jhuns@vt.edu> > To: <air-l@aoir.org> > Cc: "'robert m. tynes '" <rtynes@u.washington.edu> > Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 10:06 PM > Subject: Re: [Air-l] Lachlan Brown > > > > troll from the jargon file: > > troll > > > > 1. v.,n. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting > > on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames; or, the > > post itself. Derives from the phrase "trolling for newbies" which in > > turn comes from mainstream "trolling", a style of fishing in which one > > trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite > > > > A digression into Usenet mythmaking. > > > [Air-l] hmm, thinking about internet stories > radhika gajjala air-l@aoir.org > Fri, 22 Mar 2002 07:43:54 -0500 > > Previous message: [Air-l] Positions at Information and Media Studies, Aarhus, Denmark > Next message: [Air-l] hmm, thinking about internet stories > Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Jeremy - this is actually more along the lines of what I'm looking for too - > thankyou for articulating it :). In such an cross-disciplinary and > cross-theoretical forum as this we may get some very interesting stories indeed. > > > Thanks to everyone else who posted relevant cites - I know some of those but > not all. > > r > > > At 08:00 PM 3/21/02 -0500, you wrote: > >being somewhat of an interpretivist( at times), i was sitting here last > >night considering the net.legends faq > >http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/faqs/legends.html and what it meant > >for the wider community of usenet, and then i thought about the tropes > >and narratives that so many of us use to illustrate our points, so I > >thought I'd open up the discussion a bit. What do you use to illustrate > >your conceptualizations of the Net, some of us use classic examples like > >muds and moos, I tend to use Irc and web stories gained from my > >experiences, but have used the more acceptedly historical examples from > >time to time, but what do you use? what stories make sense of the > >internet for you? if any? do you have any really good stories, I > >participate in the community memory list about the history of the > >internet at least as lurker, to find some of these stories, but surely > >there is a broader set or are we already tending toward a set of > >canonical stories? opinions? insights? share your stories:) > > > > > >jeremy hunsinger > >jhuns@vt.edu > >on the ibook > >www.cddc.vt.edu > >www.cddc.vt.edu/jeremy > >www.dromocracy.com > > > > > > 4. 'Lachlan Brown' receives a 'relevance violation' ticket. > > > In addition to the trolling research, I'm currently conducting research > on relevance violations (apparent non-sequiturs) in synchronous chat > interactions. My data include examples of humans interacting with bots, > where the "authenticity" of the bot's interaction (i.e., how human- > like it is) is assessed in terms of the relevance of its conversational > responses. Surprisingly, the bots' responses are often no more relevant > than those of the humans -- and this is not because the bots are > highly sophisticated. Rather the norms of interaction in the (human) > chat environments (IRC, MUDs, MOOs) involve what I call "loosened > relevance" -- which is a polite way of saying that a lot of what > the participants say doesn't relate to what was said before. This > evidence suggests that humans and bots might well interact (in > certain online contexts, in certain ways) such that the former > don't realize they are interacting with the latter. It seems > plausible to me that trolling is one of those behaviors for which > bots could pass as human, since trolling involves relevance violations > (think of Lachlan's more "off the wall" posts > [see post 'chocolate' > a forward of NN's post to Nettime-l] > as recent examples). > > Regards, > > Susan > > > > http://www.aoir.org see archives. > http://www.nettime.org see archives for Nettime Bold > -- _______________________________________________ Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup Win the Ultimate Hawaiian Experience from Travelocity. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;4018363;6991039;n?http://svc.travelocity.com/promos/winhawaii/ _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold