Overly Positive

Geeky folks have it so easy these days. When I was a kid, or even a teenager, I sort of had two modes of Valentine’s Day celebration – either I had someone in my life that I was involved in, or I didn’t. This might not seem like it’s something exclusive to geekery, but to someone like me, who was perhaps of average physical appearance but all the love in the world to give through overpriced chocolate, it’s kind of a big deal. Back then, I didn’t really have very many options open to me though. I was either with someone, in which case I was all about planning a pleasant day, or I was chasing someone, which meant I was all about planning a pleasant day finding an excuse to be with them. As a result some of my Valentine’s ended fairly well, and some ended in a manner that probably reflects the awkwardness of being more into computers and sci-fi than cars and sports teams.

All my swings and misses in the romantic arena aside (though I think I’ve done pretty well for myself), today’s geek has a lot more options open to them. They can, as I did, choose to throw all their caution to the wind and go after the one person in their life that they are within slapping distance of. But they can also pursue someone that they’ve been talking to online or spending time playing a fun game or MMO with. They can use the various tools of social media and casual gaming to shoot a bit of affection over (nothing says love like giving a cow in Farmville, right?). They can maintain a relationship that spans miles and sometimes countries with the magic of video Skype and Ventrilo. And for those not into the whole romantic nonsense of it all, gifts to be given to those who are merely loved ones or close friends are a couple clicks away.

For the geek who is with someone on this day of red hearts and cheesy messages, V-Day has become another time when people can get creative with the way they express their love. From in-game MMO items to electronic greetings to Groupon love-fests and more, the discerning geek has all sorts of ways to tell that special someone that they love them. And even the traditionalist sites that give out flowers and edible goodies have modernized for folks by providing tech-friendly delivery ordering, area breakdown, and even real time  tracking for your gifts.

Either way, today isn’t a day to be cynical or sad. I think we all have someone or another that we either have or want to have be precious to us. I would like to think that we’d all have some way of expressing that friendship and love to these people, and hope that everyone realizes there’s always someone out there that does or can care for you.

Anyone who’s spent any amount of time reading things online has to have seen a knockdown, drag out fight between two or more blogs.  The gift of the written word is something of a blessing and a curse when checking something out like bloggers fighting it out. The real life classic fight in a retail store over the last purse or Tickle-Me-Elmo is nothing compared to the verbal fisticuffs people can engage in online.

Any subject is potentially a boiling pot for this kind of thing. And it all follows the same process, too. Let’s say the subject is Zebras:

-Blog A writes a rather strong opinion on how zebras should totally not have stripes, causing a storm of comments and arguments.

-Blog B, aghast that Blog A would even suggest the fact that zebras should not have stripes, writes about how they totally should and throws in a comment about how Blog A is otherwise foolish for doing so

-Blog A, feigning mock surprise at the fact that their blatantly controversial statement has caused so much of an uproar, writes an apparent clarification post about only zebras in zoos not needing stripes, throwing in a passive-aggressive link and a jab at Blog B.

-Blog B engaged in an extended flame war on Blog A’s comment section, culminating in both blogs claiming victory despite laying verbally bloody and battered on the internet battlefield.

-Blog C posts about zebras, referring to both Blog A and Blog B in turn with the very meaningful argument of “ur mom got owned”.

-Blogs D, E, F, and G create varying posts about Zebragate, with varying degrees of “not touching this shit” and “it’s like watching a trainwreck” posting.

-Blog H compiles a link list of all Blogs posting, subtly shaking their head in disbelief about the state of zebra belief on the Interwebz.

That sounds about right for some of the things I see going on. It’s a little silly that things like this are allowed to go as long as they do. This is mostly because of the fact that blogs don’t realize that until you can Force Choke someone through a monitor, both sides have unlimited verbal ammunition, driven only by the pride that they don’t want to be considered wrong or owned by the majority of the faceless internet. I dunno – fighting a war in which neither side can really die and who can continuously lob grenades and rockets at each other doesn’t seem to be a very productive one to me.

Internet discourse is going to have its fair share of agreement and disagreement. I know I’m a silly idealist, but I am not unrealistic to the point that I don’t think we’ll ever have a place where no one will have heated arguments. Heck, it can be a good thing sometimes. I do just sometimes wish that geekery realized that with great blogging power comes great responsibility – even if that responsibility is knowing when to say that you’ve shouted your opinion to the heavens and that it should stand on its own.

Zebras everywhere, I think, would appreciate it more.

In recent months (and as close to a few days ago) I’ve read a lot over Twitter, Facebook, and the interwebz at large about certain incidents that happen online as a result of the written electronic word. Whether it’s a misquoted item, a fired-up article, or something as simple as a comment in reply to a video, there’s been no shortage of issues that crop up when one commits letters to text boxes. Flame wars, Twitter sniping, apologies and non-apologies, and all sorts of verbal warfare is waged on a variety of levels. It’s sort of like knowing that the train might be coming, but not on what track, at what time, and whether or not it’s going to come off the rails and get you for not doing anything. The things I’ve seen said, repeated, reacted to, and posted are the kinds of things that get ugly real fast.

You’d think this would happen more often with print stuff, as the actual written word has had a long history of controversy and inflamed dialog depending on the work or article in question. That being said, in print it isn’t as much of a common occurrence as on the internet, for a couple reasons. The first is a modern protective process of editing, vetting, publishing, and revising that happens with most actual print books and articles. What you see printed out is something that has been passed through many hands and looked at for quality, potential issues, and posterity. The internet has no such filtering process. While some sites do retain some sort of editorial process, such as many companies for which content is observed by many, other places have a bit of a light hand when it comes to the generation of content, something which is made all the less powerful by virtue of the fact that anyone can basically post anything at any time, with little to no filters in places. The instant nature of the internet is something which both harms and helps what is written and read on it – you get what you want to know right away, but at the same time have no idea of whether or not it has been measured properly in terms of context or potential reception. It’s pretty much a powder keg just waiting for an idly thrown match.

I’d like to put in that while an ugly flame war or destructive bunch of electronic vitriol is not necessarily a pretty thing, it does have quite a bit of benefit and it highlights the need for the main point of today’s positive post about responsibility. As far as immediate benefits are concerned, a bit of the unexpected or blindsided nasty is sometimes needed in order to expose improvements needed when vetting online articles and content, or to gauge your community/visitors’ temperature as far as what gets them to the boiling point. The other good thing about a controversial blow up online is the trigger of other dialog or related issues resulting from it. When someone creates content that is what is normally expected, it’s received as any normal article online would. But when someone creates something that is a polarizing firestorm, a branching conversation of passionate opinions is the result, with the overall discourse spread out between normal joe and jane bloggers, opinionated pundits, and industry observation posts.

All of the benefits (and drawbacks) of online content crazy-time aside, the after-school special-ish lesson to be taken from this (and one which could do with a good reminder every so often) is that responsibility of online content rests with both readers and writers. For writers, it’s a logical thing, right? Before you decide to create that article that says blue pleezles are always better than red yonkers, it might do good to give yourself pause on how red yonker fans might react. Before you make a seemingly innocent tweet about how you think Pepsi is only bought by the most ridiculous sugar-obsessed giraffes, it might be worthwhile to ensure you have facts and opinions straight on giraffe sugar studies. And maybe it might be a good thing to ensure that your extremely strong opinion on how ninjas should fight with weaponry that causes paper cuts might not incite anti-paper cutting ninja reaction across the internet. All of these are good and common sense reasons for an Internet writer to take responsibility for what they create, before they do so.

But readers of internet content also have a responsibility to take as well. If the world of Youtube commenters is any sort of proof, it’s the fact that readers of content are not just passive vessels which writers fill with sometimes inflammatory words. A lot of people who read content make the same mistakes commonly seen when talking face to face with someone or working with them – they take something out of context, they misread intent and ideas, and sometimes truly make a mountain of a molehill. Internet readers are just as much a part of the content creation process as writers, because they are an audience that reacts and can give an immediate opinion on what they see – directly to the writer themselves. The formulation of opinion of an internet reader, and how they communicate that opinion, is based entirely on the level of responsibility they take when comprehending what has been shown to them on the computer screen. I think we’ve all seen the internet freakouts and rantfests that have happened that didn’t quite need to, because of the simple fact that someone who read something didn’t quite allow themselves to process it before shooting from the hip. Red yonker fans would do well to walk a mile in the shoes of the writer who talks about blue pleezles. Sugar-loving giraffe fansite admins might want to re-read the point of someone saying Pepsi is that loved by their pets. And anti-paper weapon ninjas might do well to set the katana-shaped pen down, look at how others are receiving the article on paper weapons, and have a bit more of an open mind.

When all is said and done, when both internet readers and writers take responsibility for their role in creating and discussing the content that gets put out there, it results it a better and more meaningful dialog for all. Even though that might inevitably still lead to a fiery exchange of opinions and “ur moms” – at least it will have been done knowing as much of what went into the process as possible.

I’m going to take this opportunity to pimp out Syp and Ravious’ initiative to get some bloggers together for breakfast at the bright and bushy-tailed 8:00am hour on PAX East Saturday. If you’re going, and you’re a blogger, feel free to pop on over to the link and let them know you’re there.

Inspired from that post is today’s missive about geekery connecting outside of  the barriers of electronics and technology. Back in the day, the only way you’d be able to get together people from disparate means and personalities was if they were all a part of a group close to one another – or if you believed the 80′s, through mutual detention.

It gets easier today – much easier – to forge friendships and bonds with those having different outlooks but common interests. The magic of the internet, and community building tools like mailing lists and later forums means that even if your interest is in cooking and serving leeks, there’s a group of people with the same passion as you. There’s a certain sense of secure camaraderie in connecting with these folks on an electronic level.

Taking that to the next level with a get-together always presents itself with challenges though. What will people act like “For realz”? What kind of interaction will people have when they aren’t protected by the veil of relative anonymity? What if someone you’ve bonded with turns out to have an unhealthy attachment to kitchen appliances? The possibilities are endless.

There’s a lot of apprehension behind meeting your fellow geeks offline, for sure. But ultimately, I think it’s a good thing. Attaching the name to the face is always  something of a revelation, and allows someone to really associate with a person’s written word. Activities of a normal nature like, well, breakfast, or going out to have fun, or things you’d normally do with “real life” friends that seem trivial take on a new significant meaning with folks you don’t really see all that often. If you get the chance to take the opportunity, whether at PAX East or elsewhere, make sure you grab it. You might learn something new about your fellow geeks.

The first thing I remember about recording my first podcast was how bad I was at math.

We sat around on Skype, trying to get the recording just right, and I’d gotten this notion in my head that we’d all count down at the same time so that I could sync audio streams.  Simple, right? Well, I hadn’t thought of the fact that my co-hosts and I had somehow cheated their way through basic arithmetic, for when the time came, we counted down “10…9…8…7…7…5…6..?” And thus, hilariously, began our brief foray into the New Media Geek Stage.

Since that time I’ve recorded a few more podcast episodes, tuned my writing, and fixed up my social accounts – and I think that in general, new media has been fixed up right along with it. The discerning geek has a variety of polished tools and resources at their disposal, ready for them to share with the world their most interesting of hobbies – even if that hobby is playing Tetris with their toes. Whether it is Youtube for video, Twitter for quick updates, Facebook for networking and friends, or podcasts/vodcasts for episodic nonsense, there’s more out there for someone who isn’t afraid to admit their extreme love for Cheetos to create something others can digest.

It’s a funny thing, because new media has brought on a floodgate of amateur stuff that probably would never see the light of the production day on a studio, TV, or radio station. I can’t see this as a bad thing, or a lowering of the quality of media in general – it’s actually great because of the fact that you get, as a result, a ton of choices for a particular topic. Free from the policies and standards of regular media, new media has the potential to know no boundary, creed, race, or class. Because of the “anyone can use it” philosophy, at worst you get someone who is just learning, and at best, you get geeks who have made whole careers out of taking advantage of the New Media wave (see “The Guild” or Felicia Day in general).

The obvious thought is where new media can go from here, now that it’s exploded and geeks everywhere are taking advantage of it. The answer is, honestly, wherever it wants. The near-limitless space that occupies the internet, coupled with the creativity of geekery, will mean that something, somewhere will turn up that will be entertaining, fun, and most of all, easy to get into and duplicate. I look forward to what that will be, because you know I’ll be downloading it.