In article <
[email protected]>,
Peter Cole <
[email protected]> wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
> > Michael Press wrote:
>
> >> Address matters as they arise when it matters enough to you.
> >> Editorializing and generalizing without citation
> >
> > er, how often are /you/ going to bother to cite a technical article
> > if the underinformed, under i.q.ed and and
> > terminally-incapable-of-being-open-to-new-information simply
> > dismiss it as mumbo jumbo?
And yet when others post references, many if not most of us go and check
it out. Being that the Internets about with resources that are easy to
find thanks to the Google, the resistance is not to new information but
to accepting declarations based on the arrogated authority of an
anonymous sock puppet. Especially when the available literature in the
field of said anonymous sock puppet's claimed field of expertise
contradicts the claims of said anonymous sock puppet.
> > just get straight to the point and start the abuse.
>
> So, abuse is the point?
It does seem to be for jim. He has long since stopped providing any
actual information.
> > unless the underinformed, under i.q.ed and and terminally incapable
> > actually evidence wanting to /try/ to learn something, i see no
> > point wasting time. most of those idiots, retards, etc. are not
> > here for any damned thing other than to have fight, so let them
> > have it.
>
> Right, just start insulting people immediately, because you're
> smarter than all of them. You are such an asset to this NG.
That about sums it up.
As Mike points out in another post, "jim beam" like many on Usenet
(myself included) is probably not near as arrogant and stupidly vicious
in person. Nobody would have anything to do with such a person- they'd
be unemployable and would have no friends. Anonymity tends to increase
aggression; even when we use our real names we remain fairly anonymous
to each other because we don't see a person, we just see the writing on
the screen. The more anonymous we are, the more likely we are to be
aggressive.
We probably develop context-specific "aggressive scripts" as a way of
functioning in the world in general and with repetition these scripts
become activated much more easily. Usenet and the Internet in general
provide a number of conditions conducive to aggressive behavior (e.g.,
anonymity as already noted, ambiguous social cues, impoverishment of
information [no nonverbal cues such as tone of voice, facial expression,
movements or posture which carry a large part of the meaning of a
statement], low risk of adverse consequences from aggressive behavior,
frequent frustration as one comes up against hardened positions taken by
others, etc.). Most of the aggressive behavior on the Internet would be
characterized as "instrumental aggression," in which the aggression is
not intended to injure or kill but as a way to achieve some other goal.
Some of us do a better job than the rest of managing our base impulses.
Most of us should do a better job of it.
