Do We Really Have It Right?

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
User avatar
ceeboo
God
Posts: 1005
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:22 pm

Re: Do We Really Have It Right?

Post by ceeboo »

Morning Xeno

Thanks for the clarity - It was helpful and I think I'm tracking with you now. So, moving past that........
Xenophon wrote:
Sat Sep 11, 2021 12:05 pm
I believe the majority of posters here (let's keep it simple and focus on here for now) generally want to participate in good faith and aren't attempting to deceive or mislead.
With only a couple of exceptions that come to mind - over many many years of board experience - I agree with you.
My comments were more about the idea that the online world allows us to strictly control what parts of ourselves we will reveal to those we interact with. No one is a totally open book and rightly so, you have an obligation to yourself to protect and guard your life, feelings, beliefs, family, and so on. That said, the longer and more you post the longer you leave open that narrow window for others here to peer in and occasionally gain a glimpse of a different part of you.
(Bold mine)
Good stuff, Xeno.

When I read this, I thought about private messages and how I think they lend a lot of support to your words that I have bolded . Because I wouldn't feel comfortable using another board member as an example, I will use myself as an example: Over my decade plus time hanging out on these boards, I have sent and/or received a crap ton of private messages (the number must be in the 100's) Anyway, I can tell you that I have indeed shared many personal things (some very personal) in private messages. Interestingly enough, my experiences with private messages have also resulted in other people sharing personal things with me. So, given this, I think there is something to the part of your post that I have bolded.

But I am interested in going further - digging deeper - and I am asking that you all to go with me - to think with me - to help me sort it all out. I want to see if we can rip off the wrapping paper, remove the bow, tear open the box, and take a close look at what's inside. What's really inside.

So, now that I have provided, what I believe to be, very strong support for your bolded part - I want to discuss, consider, and think through why this is. Why am I hesitant to share things on the board that I share fairly freely in a PM? Is it because I know that the PM is only for the eyes of one person? Is it that I have reached a level of trust with this one person so I feel I can let my guard down? Does this have something to do with struggles to be vulnerable? Might this have something to do with a past experience that went bad so we don't want to take the risk of a repeated bad experience? Or, am I really over thinking all of this and it's much more simple - that being, we usually don't broadcast personal things on the public board because, well, it's just not wise. Full stop. At this point, I am leaning to the later but while I lean, I am also very interested to hear your thoughts on all of this. (For clarity, I am not talking about in real life information like real names - I am talking about personal information like sharing that you battled a drug addiction for several years)

Digging deeper: Why wouldn't I post something on the board that I would post in a PM? Is it based in fear? If so, is the fear real? And if the fear is real, what am I afraid of? If I am trying to be protective, what exactly do I think I am protecting? Why do I feel the need to protect whatever it is that I am protecting?
You have more control here than really any aspect of your life about the person that you present to the world
I agree that you have more control here, do doubt in my mind - I think you have significantly more control here.

Having this kind of control brings me right back to our previous discussions about online personas. I had a good night sleep and I had more time to chew on this but I remain in a pretty foggy place about the entire online persona scenario. In my mind, at least currently, There still seems to be a kink in the hose on this for me. I know the water is on and I know there is a kink in the hose, but at this point, I still don't know how to fix the kink that would allow the water to run it's entire course and come out of the other side. So, given that, If there are any plumbers amongst us, I would appreciate some advice on how I might be able fix this hose blockage caused by online personas.
User avatar
Xenophon
Savior (resurrected state)
Posts: 998
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:29 pm

Re: Do We Really Have It Right?

Post by Xenophon »

Morning to you as well, Ceebs.

I think your ability to share more personal information via PMs as opposed to the wide board is a very natural and healthy response. Socially we have evolved to be guarded against anyone not part of our tribe for very good reasons. Yes sometimes (or maybe more often nowadays) that barrier can led to unhealthy interactions but there is a reason it is there. Centuries of social interaction has taught humans to be wary of those they don't yet know or have bonds with.

I suspect that you wouldn't PM someone you hadn't already had several interactions with and so beginning that dialog is a signal that you don't consider them an "other" but rather a part of your tribe, or at least a part of a tribe you also feel connected with. Keep in mind that in any online space the membership or audience is a lot like an iceberg. Even in our little corner the people that actively post here make up only a small percentage of the total traffic. I myself lurked here without an account for almost 3 years before I made my first post.

As to whether or not your fears are "real". I'd say they absolutely are, whether or not a fear is grounded or well placed or thought out doesn't stop it from being a real fear. I suspect everyone is probably a bit too protective at times but there can be negative consequences to our online interactions. I have my own personal experience with an internet friend that got very out of hand. Maybe I'll share the full story at some point but long story short, someone I played online games with for some time grew very aggressive and hostile as I slowed my participation for other things. It culminated in him sending death threats to the woman who would become my wife, blaming her for stealing me away. A little caution is always warranted.

As to the kink in your hose around online personas I'm a bit perplexed. You seem to acknowledge that we probably aren't 100% the same individual here that we are online or at least that all of us is not visible. Only part of our very rich and complex lives is on display. Is it the word choice that is throwing you off? Maybe if it was framed just as the facet of your personality that is visible here versus a "persona" it would sit better?
He/Him

“If you consider what are called the virtues in mankind, you will find their growth is assisted by education and cultivation.”
― Xenophon
User avatar
ceeboo
God
Posts: 1005
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:22 pm

Re: Do We Really Have It Right?

Post by ceeboo »

Xenophon wrote:
Sat Sep 11, 2021 2:49 pm
I think your ability to share more personal information via PMs as opposed to the wide board is a very natural and healthy response. Socially we have evolved to be guarded against anyone not part of our tribe for very good reasons. Yes sometimes (or maybe more often nowadays) that barrier can led to unhealthy interactions but there is a reason it is there. Centuries of social interaction has taught humans to be wary of those they don't yet know or have bonds with.
Good stuff.

Take me further down the path of this "tribe" thing, if you would. I am asking because I'm not convinced (If I am understanding a tribe the way you are) Let me give you an example that might help you decide how you can, or would like to, take me further down this path. I have gotten to know someone on this board (I'm going to try, as best as I can, to conceal the identity of this person as I don't know if this person would appreciate me putting this on the board and I'm not sure it's good form to do so) I have grown to respect this person deeply, I admire this person and value this person quite a bit. Yes, our "relationship" is limited due to the things that we all face on these boards - but I still feel like it's a sincere, trusting "relationship" - and it's based on mutual respect. It's also a relationship that I greatly value for what it's worth. I have exchanged PM's with this individual and I have shared some fairly personal things (This person has also shared personal things with me) - Anyway, this person I speak of is not a Bible believing Christian - This person is clearly Atheist/Agnostic (I am a Bible believing Christian) This person is politically left of center, perhaps far left (I am right of center) This person has had personal experiences within Mormonism (I have none) This person is highly educated (I am a first semester, first year, community college drop out) - So this is where I need some help with the "tribe" thing because I can't imagine that us two would be in the same "tribe" (Unless I am completely misunderstanding what a tribe is and how they are formed)
I myself lurked here without an account for almost 3 years before I made my first post.
Ha! What took you so long?
As to whether or not your fears are "real". I'd say they absolutely are, whether or not a fear is grounded or well placed or thought out doesn't stop it from being a real fear.
Good point.
I suspect everyone is probably a bit too protective at times but there can be negative consequences to our online interactions. I have my own personal experience with an internet friend that got very out of hand. Maybe I'll share the full story at some point but long story short, someone I played online games with for some time grew very aggressive and hostile as I slowed my participation for other things. It culminated in him sending death threats to the woman who would become my wife, blaming her for stealing me away. A little caution is always warranted.
Wow! That's nuts!

(Please let your wife know that I am not interested in stealing you. At all. Please tell her that I am just looking to borrow you, for a short amount of time, and that I promise I will give you back - uninjured in any way)
to the kink in your hose around online personas I'm a bit perplexed. You seem to acknowledge that we probably aren't 100% the same individual here that we are online or at least that all of us is not visible. Only part of our very rich and complex lives is on display. Is it the word choice that is throwing you off? Maybe if it was framed just as the facet of your personality that is visible here versus a "persona" it would sit better?
I'm really not sure. All I can tell you is that this entire "online persona" discussion is just looping in my head and I don't think I know where put it down at this point. I keep thinking that this is a big deal - A really big deal - I think if I understood how these online personas are really constructed - or how they evolve - or what exactly they really are (beyond what Google has to say) - It would be helpful to me.

Here's a simple google hit:

Internet identity (IID), also online identity or internet persona, is a social identity that an Internet user establishes in online communities and websites. It can also be considered as an actively constructed presentation of oneself.

One of the things that keeps going through my skull about this (There are more, this is just one) is this idea of "an actively constructed presentation of oneself" - While this is a very shallow description, I don't think I buy it. What I mean to say is that I don't think that I actively construct a presentation of myself (That sounds phony to me) I think, for the most part, I am me on the board. Full stop. I don't try and construct or create anything. At least I don't think I do - And I recognize that this might be what the kink in the is - that I don't think I do (But I do?)

Anyway, still thinking and I do appreciate you engaging.
User avatar
Xenophon
Savior (resurrected state)
Posts: 998
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:29 pm

Re: Do We Really Have It Right?

Post by Xenophon »

Appreciate you entertaining my thoughts, Ceebo. I should also point out I'm not 100% married to any of these ideas, just fleshing out the concepts with you in real time. I won't be offended if you aren't on board. Also continue to bear with me as I write this from a moving vehicle.

Part 1) Tribes. It doesn't surprise me to learn that you have members that you are deeply connected to, appreciate the input from, or highly admire that on the surface wouldn't otherwise seem like someone you could be friends with. That is the problem with "othering" people, labeling them in a way that allows you to ignore or dismiss them (speaking generally here, not specifically to you). Humans use labels to quickly categorize people into varying buckets of friend or foe but what we find when we dig into those labels is they aren't always that useful and they lack the nuance necessary to truly capture what is meaningful in our relationships. At its base level this behavior is at the root of partisan politics, discrimination, and a whole host of other plagues to polite discourse. But it doesn't always have to, we can break past it.

Growing up in the deep south I've known many people who hold deeply racist views. Folks that are comfortable reffering to minorities with the most vile kinds of slurs, but often only in a general sense. It isn't uncommon to see them have a close friend who is a minority. We say the same things in politics, left leaning folks who might otherwise say vile things about Republicans but love their right of center spouse (there isreally no end to the examples, don't tar and feather me over the two I picked for brevity's sake) . It is because they have gotten to know these individuals and have broken past those initial labels into the nuance and context of the human being they are associating with.

So to your confusion. It sounds like the people you are looking to put into your tribe are thoughtful people that have other characteristics than superficial labels like "Christian or Atheist", "Left vs Right leaning". Given that your initial reaction is to say that those labels belie your friendship suggest your brain is still making assumptions and value decisions based on those labels though (we all do, not an attempt to pick on you).

That said, your brain is still wired to make these kinds of decisions. It has developed over a long time to leverage labels to help make value decisions about new people in you life. The self improvement journey for me has been in part trying to get away from that and instead focusing on some "labels" that are a little harder to gather at first glance. Does this person bring value to my life? Do they help me be a better person? When I focus on those kinds of questions it leads me to develop deeper and more meaningful relationships with people that I wouldn't have expected based upon initial superficial labels.

It is a tough task getting past your brain's initial reactions to things. It is a complex and crazy thing and it does so much work behind the scenes that we really just aren't always aware of, which happens to segway pretty well into part 2... stay tuned.
He/Him

“If you consider what are called the virtues in mankind, you will find their growth is assisted by education and cultivation.”
― Xenophon
User avatar
Xenophon
Savior (resurrected state)
Posts: 998
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:29 pm

Re: Do We Really Have It Right?

Post by Xenophon »

Part 2) Constructed personas. Every time you post on this board you make concious and uncocious decisions (hopefully this isn't a crazy concept but if it is, just hang with it). You decide what you post, the words you use, the tone you take, who you respond to, what topics you engage. Every one of these impacts how everyone else perceives you. You obviously can't control what they think but all those choices you make do have an impact.

How many times have you started to respond to something then decided against it? Have you ever rewritten a post because you were worried how the other poster would take it? How many posters do you go out of your way to engage when you can (either because you like to or because you want to counter them)? Do you have any topics you won't touch with a ten foot pole? Have you ever posted a serious of gifs to try to shift the mood of the board? These and any number of questions creates the online personality that is Ceebo.

You may not intend to "craft" some special persona but you can't help it, it happens anyway. You're also right that in real life Ceebo might be pretty close to online Ceebo but the differences in communication methods essentially guarantee at least some differences. Almost no one I know writes the same way they speak. And this is just covering all the concious decisions you make, we haven't even touched on what your brain is doing behind the scenes.

Which I think leads to where your hangup may be. Forgive me but I'm going to get a bit speculative here based on our historical interactions. I vividly recall a conversation that you, I and beastie (man I miss her, what an awesome voice we no long have here) had surrounding implicit bias. We went back and forth behind the science around it, how it manifests in the real world, and a wide range of solutions that are leveraged in the real world to combat it. I'll have to see if I can find that old conversation but I'm fairly certain where we ended was that you still had a very hard time accepting that your brain was making some behind the scenes decisions that you had little to no control over or visibility to. The focus was primarily around racial scenarios where it happens but the larger point remains. Your brain is doing stuff all the time that is a product of evolution, history, upbringing, social cues, etc. that you only consider after the fact and will often invent justification for out of whole cloth.

I'm not prepared to rehash that right now, perhaps another time, and I'm unsure if your understanding/position on that has shifted at all over the years. I suspect that any hangup you still have around your subconscious brain making meaningful decisions may be interfering with the idea that you're presenting yourself differently here comparatively to anywhere else.

Edited to add: On rereading that last bit it reads a bit harsher than I intended. It wasn't meant to be a value comment on where you stand with the implicit parts of the brain just an attempt to see where you and I may be "missing" on the topic.
He/Him

“If you consider what are called the virtues in mankind, you will find their growth is assisted by education and cultivation.”
― Xenophon
User avatar
ceeboo
God
Posts: 1005
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:22 pm

Re: Do We Really Have It Right?

Post by ceeboo »

Xenophon wrote:
Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:46 pm
Appreciate you entertaining my thoughts, Ceebo.
And I appreciate you entertaining mine - I also appreciate you thread contributions.
I should also point out I'm not 100% married to any of these ideas, just fleshing out the concepts with you in real time.
Awesome - I think that's a great way for all of us to engage.
Also continue to bear with me as I write this from a moving vehicle.
Are you sitting in the drivers seat? :o

I really appreciate you taking the time to post the rest of this post - Please don't assume anything about why I am not replying to it at this time. I'm going to move on to your second part now.
User avatar
ceeboo
God
Posts: 1005
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:22 pm

Re: Do We Really Have It Right?

Post by ceeboo »

Xenophon wrote:
Sat Sep 11, 2021 5:17 pm
Part 2) Constructed personas. Every time you post on this board you make concious and uncocious decisions (hopefully this isn't a crazy concept but if it is, just hang with it). You decide what you post, the words you use, the tone you take, who you respond to, what topics you engage. Every one of these impacts how everyone else perceives you. You obviously can't control what they think but all those choices you make do have an impact.
I am with you so far.
How many times have you started to respond to something then decided against it?
Far too many to count.
Have you ever rewritten a post because you were worried how the other poster would take it?
Yes - many times.
How many posters do you go out of your way to engage when you can (either because you like to or because you want to counter them)?
A few.
Do you have any topics you won't touch with a ten foot pole?
Yes - I can think of one.
Have you ever posted a serious of gifs to try to shift the mood of the board?
I have posted countless gifs but never to "change the mood of the board."
You may not intend to "craft" some special persona but you can't help it, it happens anyway.
I'm still with you.
Which I think leads to where your hangup may be. Forgive me but I'm going to get a bit speculative here based on our historical interactions.
No need to ask for forgiveness, I asked you to take me down this path and I appreciate your willingness to do so.
I vividly recall a conversation that you, I and beastie (man I miss her, what an awesome voice we no long have here) had surrounding implicit bias.
I remember. (I enjoyed beastie as well)
We went back and forth behind the science around it, how it manifests in the real world, and a wide range of solutions that are leveraged in the real world to combat it. I'll have to see if I can find that old conversation but I'm fairly certain where we ended was that you still had a very hard time accepting that your brain was making some behind the scenes decisions that you had little to no control over or visibility to. The focus was primarily around racial scenarios where it happens but the larger point remains. Your brain is doing stuff all the time that is a product of evolution, history, upbringing, social cues, etc. that you only consider after the fact and will often invent justification for out of whole cloth.
Trying to stay with you but I feel it's only right to let you know that our grip is starting to slip some.
I'm not prepared to rehash that right now, perhaps another time, and I'm unsure if your understanding/position on that has shifted at all over the years. I suspect that any hangup you still have around your subconscious brain making meaningful decisions may be interfering with the idea that you're presenting yourself differently here comparatively to anywhere else.
Barely hanging on at this point. But I am willing to think about this some.
Edited to add: On rereading that last bit it reads a bit harsher than I intended. It wasn't meant to be a value comment on where you stand with the implicit parts of the brain just an attempt to see where you and I may be "missing" on the topic.
For what it's worth, I didn't think it was harsh at all. Rather, I think you made a significant effort and spend a decent amount of time to share your thoughts with me about how you see things. Thanks!
User avatar
ceeboo
God
Posts: 1005
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:22 pm

Re: Do We Really Have It Right?

Post by ceeboo »

As I continue to think about the idea of "online personas" and everything that surrounds this rather opaque topic, in my opinion (specifically how these online personas are formed by construction, earning, attaching oneself to, slip ups, and possible other things that I haven't thought of) - I wanted to lay something else before you all in hopes of getting more opinions/thoughts/ideas/perspectives on the table.

Schmo introduced this to the thread: "People have different reasons for participating here" - I think it's a huge factor and I also think it plays a significant role as it relates to the thread topic "Do we really have it right?"

So yeah, I believe that the motives that people have for participating on a discussion board really is a thing, but on a board like this one (discuss Mormonism) I think the "thing" becomes a much bigger "thing." Or at least has the potential to.

As I was thinking about this, I could literally think of countless examples and I am sure there are more that I haven't thought of. In an effort to kick this off, I will give one example using fictional characters:

Character "A" - A 37 year old female, She is a BOC TBM, sealed to her husband in the LDS temple, 3 young kids - (For whatever reason you want imagine here) she currently finds herself going through a massive faith crisis - She is freaking out, worried beyond belief, her emotions are raging, She is thinking about her husband and children 24/7.............She ends up of on this board (A Mormon related board) to seek answers, find support, learn, etc.

Character 'B" - A 41 year old male. He left the LDS church over 20 years ago, he has already went through his faith crisis decades ago and has come out the other side of it, He has been participating on this board for 20 years, He considers many board members as online friends and he participates as a mixed bag (posts about serious stuff, enjoys interesting discussions, loves banter, laughs a lot, and even uses silly gifs quite often.)

So, one day, character A is on the board and on this day she has wiped the tears from her eyes and is seriously seeking information and answers around Fanny Alger (Someone told her that Joseph Smith had several wives and that some of these wives were very young) - Again, she is going through a faith crisis, she is worried about so many things but she needs to find information/answers. Obviously, she is very serious while participating here. As she navigates around the board, she decides to open a few threads and starts to read. One of the threads that she is reading is a thread titled "The Early History Of Mormonism" - But, this particular thread is a very old thread, it's now on page 37 and for the last 5 pages there were only 3 posters participating and one of these 3 was character b. These three posters (who all know one another very well - with at least a decade together on this board) were just having some fun amongst each other - character b was posting gifs of whales and raccoons (wink!) there was lots of laughter, character b posted several laughing smilies and a few more silly gifs.... they were just really yucking it up between one another (having no clue that character A even existed, let alone that character A was reading their discussions taking place.) So, what do you suppose character A thought of Character b? Do you think character A "really had it right" concerning character B?

That's just one example of countless examples I can think of as it relates to Scmo's earlier thread contribution "people have different reason for participating here."

Your thoughts, ideas, perspectives, and experiences are welcome.

Again, the floor is yours, if you want it.
Lem
God
Posts: 2456
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 12:46 am

Re: Do We Really Have It Right?

Post by Lem »

ceeboo wrote:
Sun Sep 12, 2021 12:04 pm
As I continue to think about the idea of "online personas" and everything that surrounds this rather opaque topic, in my opinion (specifically how these online personas are formed by construction, earning, attaching oneself to, slip ups, and possible other things that I haven't thought of) - I wanted to lay something else before you all in hopes of getting more opinions/thoughts/ideas/perspectives on the table.

Schmo introduced this to the thread: "People have different reasons for participating here" - I think it's a huge factor and I also think it plays a significant role as it relates to the thread topic "Do we really have it right?"

So yeah, I believe that the motives that people have for participating on a discussion board really is a thing, but on a board like this one (discuss Mormonism) I think the "thing" becomes a much bigger "thing." Or at least has the potential to.

As I was thinking about this, I could literally think of countless examples and I am sure there are more that I haven't thought of. In an effort to kick this off, I will give one example using fictional characters:

Character "A" - A 37 year old female, She is a BOC TBM, sealed to her husband in the LDS temple, 3 young kids - (For whatever reason you want imagine here) she currently finds herself going through a massive faith crisis - She is freaking out, worried beyond belief, her emotions are raging, She is thinking about her husband and children 24/7.............She ends up of on this board (A Mormon related board) to seek answers, find support, learn, etc.

Character 'B" - A 41 year old male. He left the LDS church over 20 years ago, he has already went through his faith crisis decades ago and has come out the other side of it, He has been participating on this board for 20 years, He considers many board members as online friends and he participates as a mixed bag (posts about serious stuff, enjoys interesting discussions, loves banter, laughs a lot, and even uses silly gifs quite often.)

So, one day, character A is on the board and on this day she has wiped the tears from her eyes and is seriously seeking information and answers around Fanny Alger (Someone told her that Joseph Smith had several wives and that some of these wives were very young) - Again, she is going through a faith crisis, she is worried about so many things but she needs to find information/answers. Obviously, she is very serious while participating here. As she navigates around the board, she decides to open a few threads and starts to read. One of the threads that she is reading is a thread titled "The Early History Of Mormonism" - But, this particular thread is a very old thread, it's now on page 37 and for the last 5 pages there were only 3 posters participating and one of these 3 was character b. These three posters (who all know one another very well - with at least a decade together on this board) were just having some fun amongst each other - character b was posting gifs of whales and raccoons (wink!) there was lots of laughter, character b posted several laughing smilies and a few more silly gifs.... they were just really yucking it up between one another (having no clue that character A even existed, let alone that character A was reading their discussions taking place.) So, what do you suppose character A thought of Character b? Do you think character A "really had it right" concerning character B?

That's just one example of countless examples I can think of as it relates to Scmo's earlier thread contribution "people have different reason for participating here."

Your thoughts, ideas, perspectives, and experiences are welcome.

Again, the floor is yours, if you want it.
I’m enjoying reading this thread, so If you wouldn’t mind another opinion, I’d like to respond.

First, just a straightforward response to your fictional example. I would start by noting that, regardless of their backstories, there is no reason not to assume that characters A and B are roughly of equal intelligence, and have roughly equal experience using the internet. The short answer, then, is that character B has no obligation to change their posting style to protect the unknown character A, and character A may read a discussion forum with interest but will not assume an unknown forum is an appropriate place to begin serious research on a topic.

Going deeper, If you will indulge an observation, you picked this one one fictional example out of the many possibilities that you acknowledged could exist. So, why this one? At first glance, it seems to be set up as an example of modern day chivalry, where the accomplished knight has an obligation to rescue the helpless and hapless princess, or at least the princess expects it and maybe the knight resents it? (I can’t quite tell what “did they get it right” means?). You may not have meant it that way, but since this is a discussion about perceived online persona, I hope you won’t mind an observation that that is how it reads to me.

I mean no offense with this observation, it is just that it instantly jumps out as being based on some underlying assumptions that are imposed on the example from the outside rather than being organic to the generic concept of considering both oneself’s and other’s perceptions and actions in an internet setting. I know I can be brusque when I speak, so I want to say again, this is just an observation about how the example you chose comes across, and I intend no offense.

Once we take away the assigned attributes and consider how many millions of variations there could be besides just those two, it becomes a far more realistic example. Really, wouldn’t it be a better baseline, when considering the anonymity and variation of possible readers, to just start with the assumption that they are both basically intelligent, roughly equally skilled in various areas of communication and interface, and both at least somewhat experienced in navigating the internet? Obviously I’m not talking about children or people who really do need our assistance, but the general case of communicating with equals in which the feeling of being obligated to protect or rescue fades considerably. I think that approach leaves us in a more realistic, but of course admittedly more complex, position to talk about online personas.

And last, I think I may have missed a part of this example:
So, what do you suppose character A thought of Character b? Do you think character A "really had it right" concerning character B?
I may have missed something, but was there an earlier statement about a character A type, and their perception of a character B type? Does “really had it right” refer specifically to an earlier part of this example?
User avatar
ceeboo
God
Posts: 1005
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:22 pm

Re: Do We Really Have It Right?

Post by ceeboo »

Hey Lem
Lem wrote:
Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:22 pm
I’m enjoying reading this thread, so If you wouldn’t mind another opinion, I’d like to respond.
I'm glad you're enjoying the thread - I am enjoying it too. No, I wouldn't mind another opinion at all. As a matter of fact, I asked for them and I am looking forward to them (Yours included)
First, just a straightforward response to your fictional example. I would start by noting that, regardless of their backstories, there is no reason not to assume that characters A and B are roughly of equal intelligence, and have roughly equal experience using the internet. The short answer, then, is that character B has no obligation to change their posting style to protect the unknown character A, and character A may read a discussion forum with interest but will not assume an unknown forum is an appropriate place to begin serious research on a topic.
I understand your point and I find it to be a good one - But, I don't think your above statement (while a good one) addresses the potential for person A, to possibly see person B, as an unserious person or a silly jokester - And that was the point I was trying to lay before all of us as we consider this as a community.
Going deeper, If you will indulge an observation,
I would be happy to indulge an observation.
you picked this one one fictional example out of the many possibilities that you acknowledged could exist. So, why this one?
I think I picked this one in an effort to show a more extreme example and because of the board we are on (Mormon related)
At first glance, it seems to be set up as an example of modern day chivalry, where the accomplished knight has an obligation to rescue the helpless and hapless princess, or at least the princess expects it and maybe the knight resents it?
If I try super hard, I can see how you could take it that way. It wasn't my intent, but again, I can see how you (or anyone else) could have taken it that way.
(I can’t quite tell what “did they get it right” means?)
Well, in my mind, I would say it's entirely possible that person A sees person B as an unserious, immature, buffoon who has no interest in discussing important things. (Even though person A witnessed a very small sample of the extremely long and many years resume on this board of person B. And that was/is the point I was trying to put before the board)
You may not have meant it that way, but since this is a discussion about perceived online persona, I hope you won’t mind an observation that that is how it reads to me.
I will go further than simply letting you know that I don't mind it - I greatly appreciate you letting me know how it reads to you because that, in and on itself, is very much a part of this thread early on, and continues to be a very significant part the entire discussion. Online personas included.
I mean no offense with this observation,
None taken.
it is just that it instantly jumps out as being based on some underlying assumptions that are imposed on the example from the outside rather than being organic to the generic concept of considering both oneself’s and other’s perceptions and actions in an internet setting. I know I can be brusque when I speak, so I want to say again, this is just an observation about how the example you chose comes across, and I intend no offense.
Understood. All I can say is that I could have chose any number of examples to illustrate the "different motives" consideration. I have already mentioned why I chose the one I did but if you have any follow up questions, please feel free to ask them.
Once we take away the assigned attributes and consider how many millions of variations there could be besides just those two, it becomes a far more realistic example. Really, wouldn’t it be a better baseline, when considering the anonymity and variation of possible readers, to just start with the assumption that they are both basically intelligent, roughly equally skilled in various areas of communication and interface, and both at least somewhat experienced in navigating the internet? Obviously I’m not talking about children or people who really do need our assistance, but the general case of communicating with equals where the feeling of being obligated to protect or rescue fades considerably. I think that approach leaves us in a more realistic, but of course admittedly more complex, position to talk about online personas.
These are really good points, in my opinion - But I wasn't talking about online personas, specifically, when I offered my fictional A nd B person scenario. I was specifically trying to launch a discussion about how/why/if the various and different reasons why people post here (the various motives) play a role, or multiple roles, regarding the thread question, "Do we really have it right?" , And in my opinion, they not only play a role, they can play a very significant role.
I may have missed something, but was there an earlier statement about a character A type, and their perception of a character B type? Does “really had it right” refer specifically to an earlier part of this example?
I'm not sure I am understanding your question? If you want to try again, I would be happy to answer.

I appreciate your thread contribution and I look forward to hearing more of your thoughts.

ETA:

Sorry Lem - I have copy/pasted (below in blue) the last past of your post to me - I was the one who was confused because I didn't realize, at first, that one of those quotes was mine - and not all of yours.

This was a Ceeboo quote - So, what do you suppose character A thought of Character b? Do you think character A "really had it right" concerning character B?

(This was a Lem response to the Ceeboo quote) - I may have missed something, but was there an earlier statement about a character A type, and their perception of a This character B type? Does “really had it right” refer specifically to an earlier part of this example?


Yeah, It looks like I forgot to finish the thought in writing (But I did have it in my head when I was typing, for what it's worth) :lol:

I should have typed that character A sees character B as an unserious buffoon who isn't interested in important discussions or anything about the many layers of Mormonism (Character A, being someone who was/is interested in discussing important things and learning about Mormonism)
Post Reply