« testify | Main | radio blog »


I don't know, it got pretty heated on here when everyone was discussing the value of propositions.

I know I've referenced this elsewhere but perhaps it can fit here as well.

"Griefer is a term for a player who, in an online, multiplayer computer game, deliberately sets out to harass other players. A griefer is a kind of troll, though the term is often used as an insult towards PvP gamers in general...Griefers differ from typical players in that they do not play the game in order to achieve objectives defined by the game world."


Griefing is a powerful tool almost anyone can deploy, especially when operating in a world that's gone "beyond disruption." (I wonder if Chiat will add this to their planning-tool lexicon! Joke!)

One of my own personal "online" fears has to do with the idea of astroturfing.


My "fear" of astroturfing is slightly diminished by the idea of "comments," as if they somehow validate a position of truth and security regarding an article or a post.

I think the line becomes even more blurred when we throw planning into the mix as our objective-stricken "professional duties" subsequently manifest in this subjective online world. Ironically, this is more Gladwell's idea of the "Power of Context" than my own.

Not sure if anyone else thinks about the paradoxes of planning each day. I suppose if I had a nifty pie chart to represent my time, this subject would certainly necessitate its own slice. Sometimes I look at my resume and can't help but laugh out loud at the ambiguity.

John Hegarty, when asked "Why are you Creative," by Herman Vaskes in "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants," said, "ha, ha, ha. That's the only thing I can do really, ha ha. I cant write a contact report. I think creative people are basically insecure."

To end this tiresome rant that is probably close to penetrating that "low uncomfortable threshold," I once again choose redundancy, embrace insecurity, and tell what I believe to be a good joke even though a commenter claimed it not because, as they so rightfully said, "jokes are funny":

A guy goes to the doctor to get examined. The doctor comes in and sees the guy's arms are stained blue all the way past his elbows and a rash has clearly developed. The doctor says, "My god. That's a terrible rash and your arms are all blue. How did this happen?"

And the guy says, "Well, you know those lavatories on the planes. Well, I'm the one in charge of draining the lavs. Everyday I'm out on the runway, hooking up the hose and draining those things. A lot of the times, well, the connection ain't so great, and, obviously, I get a little soaked now and then."

And the doctor says, "That sounds horrible, you should get a new job."

And the guy replies, "What? And get out of aviation?"

Blog Rage is a troublesome thing. It is tempting to get into rant mode, but I do try and calm myself down. I don't really have much of a problem with comments becuase there is a relatively small group of people who pop on by and they're all really rather splendid.

I have always wondered what the long term effects of the internet will be on our future generations.

We have created forums and platforms where people can hide behind anonymously behind their computer screens and say whatever (mean things) they want without consequences. I doubt some of these raging bloggers would say the same things if they had to do it in person.

Cowards, all of them.

lauren, I agree. it's eerie to think about the blogs, myspace pages, youtube videos, and flickr accounts we'll leave behind. It'll be great for historians though. Our branded grandchildren will be so confused!

Who knows, maybe it will help change the paradigm for how we perceive karma and resurrection for that matter. Paradigm-shifts are pretty hot right now.

"We can rebuild him. We know how. We have the technology!"

God I loved the first Matrix. Why couldn't they just give up some damn screenwriting control for the other two. "Looks great, just make the logo bigger," in my opinion.

Mean people will find ways to mess up communications. They corrupted speech, sign language and print before moving on to IM, MySpace and TypePad. That's just the way of the world.

The nice thing is that the planning blog space is relatively well behaved. Despite the fact that there are a million different ways to answer the same communications question, the varied perspectives/answers are all part of what makes this "scene" so interesting.

And as for our purposeful online archiving of our lives...I love it. It's real-time history.

That's the most stupid post i've ever read in my whole life...

Sorry but that was beyond my control, I had to vent my rage senselessly, without any purpose.

I think half the problem is something I often refer to as 'blogging etiquette', in that, it's still only really taking shape.

15-20 years ago written communication was clearly about 'formal rules' - address, date, Times New Roman font, 'yours sincerely' etc. - even the 'angry' stuff!

Email and blogging have clearly 'informalised' these conventions and now no one's quite sure what is acceptable or not. Which, like any innovative medium, is half the appeal in the beginning I suppose. In fact, half the people that 'blog angry' probably think that's what blogging's for! (okay, perhaps I exaggerate..)

I agree that angry blogging is provocative and pointless, but the idea of 'blogging rules', filtering etc. doesn't really sit well with me either - it would just stifle ideas and takes blogging back to the formalist doldrums that it originally set out to overturn.

As an impulse comment, no doubt I'll probably read this in a few minutes and think it was a shockingly lame contribution! But maybe that's it: with such 'live emotion' at work you're always going to get the nice, constructive stuff (and possibly make a few cyber-pals along the way..) and then the unconstructive or angry and annoying stuff.

(I for one hope this doesn’t fall into the latter.)

Good topic. From what I see, I think the tone is set by the blogger. Blogs that are interesting, thought provoking and generous - share lots of good stuff, like most of the planning blogs, are generally respected. Those that are opinionated or out to provoke, do just that and are generally not respected and become a target for wierdness.

Bit slow on the upatke here Russell... but fwiw as I think I said to you ages ago, if I'd come to blogging 'cold' the CIF comments would have been a shock. Now, I read them once and forget about them. I'm always happy to repsond to people who want to further the discussion. I know some of the Guardian columnists freaked out when they first saw the mail bag at CIF. But tit-for-tat commenting on vicious comments doesn't help either. Very easy to descend to a very petty level of discussion.

I don't undertand the folk who spend so much time visciously venting in comment boxes. Maybe a non-anonymous commenting system would help discussion. I know The Guardian are looking at ways to ease civilised discussion on CIF, but they don't want to appear like nasty great dictatorial censors. It's a difficult act to get right.

At the end of the day, if people can find out who you are and where you live :) - they might refrain or be more civil. Look what happened to the shithole blogger...


The comments to this entry are closed.