I'm with you. Take this part, saying that thoughtful discussion is potentially dull and time-wasting:
> Flippancy is more fun. The work of reaching out and explaining things is potentially dull and time-wasting; it’s just plain funnier and more exciting and more gratifying to be on the inside of shared assumptions.
He has it completely backwards - standard internet sarcasm is incredibly boring and repetitive. It's sad when a good site gets popular and the same cliched rudeness and snark replaces and pushes out the good and thoughtful discussion.
Its not only sad online but offline to. I wonder what causes people to talk/write in a snark fashion? What is the main motivator. To be cool? Get noticed? I guess youtube comments are the perfect example.
Maybe only thoughtful discussions can be had when a group is limited to a certain size and status is defined by the most original discussions. Not by the most accepted.
> I wonder what causes people to talk/write in a snark fashion? What is the main motivator. To be cool? Get noticed?
It's a part of it - is regarded as cool to be angsty and defiant. When someone doesn't actually have intelligent points, they can just make the same joke they read about in the newspaper or heard a comedian say.
> Maybe only thoughtful discussions can be had when a group is limited to a certain size...
I think this is more true with men than women - I think men jockey for status a little more.
> ...and status is defined by the most original discussions
Either that, or a clearly defined hierarchy. If it's clear who is in charge and there's mutual respect, there's no status jockeying. It's when it's not clear who is in a leadership role or there's not mutual respect that you get the most of it. Anonymity only makes that worse.
- So you would say its not only to be cool and get noticed but its also to say something, without caring about its originality, just to re-express a comment that has a proven effect? And this is better than saying nothing?
- Not sure I agree with your comment about women vs men with status. I believe that no matter what the information is, the social dynamic is different given a smaller group/context. It helps all of us narrow the focus.
- No clue why I keep hearing this love of hierarchy, respect and accountability. Whats wrong with just having something worth talking about? I think we all have a voice, maybe not the best tools to deliver it. But I think that's our job. :)
Comments
I'm with you. Take this part, saying that thoughtful discussion is potentially dull and time-wasting:
> Flippancy is more fun. The work of reaching out and explaining things is potentially dull and time-wasting; it’s just plain funnier and more exciting and more gratifying to be on the inside of shared assumptions.
He has it completely backwards - standard internet sarcasm is incredibly boring and repetitive. It's sad when a good site gets popular and the same cliched rudeness and snark replaces and pushes out the good and thoughtful discussion.
Its not only sad online but offline to. I wonder what causes people to talk/write in a snark fashion? What is the main motivator. To be cool? Get noticed? I guess youtube comments are the perfect example.
Maybe only thoughtful discussions can be had when a group is limited to a certain size and status is defined by the most original discussions. Not by the most accepted.
> I wonder what causes people to talk/write in a snark fashion? What is the main motivator. To be cool? Get noticed?
It's a part of it - is regarded as cool to be angsty and defiant. When someone doesn't actually have intelligent points, they can just make the same joke they read about in the newspaper or heard a comedian say.
> Maybe only thoughtful discussions can be had when a group is limited to a certain size...
I think this is more true with men than women - I think men jockey for status a little more.
> ...and status is defined by the most original discussions
Either that, or a clearly defined hierarchy. If it's clear who is in charge and there's mutual respect, there's no status jockeying. It's when it's not clear who is in a leadership role or there's not mutual respect that you get the most of it. Anonymity only makes that worse.
- So you would say its not only to be cool and get noticed but its also to say something, without caring about its originality, just to re-express a comment that has a proven effect? And this is better than saying nothing?
- Not sure I agree with your comment about women vs men with status. I believe that no matter what the information is, the social dynamic is different given a smaller group/context. It helps all of us narrow the focus.
- No clue why I keep hearing this love of hierarchy, respect and accountability. Whats wrong with just having something worth talking about? I think we all have a voice, maybe not the best tools to deliver it. But I think that's our job. :)