A web forum being a more tradional version of a bulletin board system. In the lecture there was discussion over two forums on the web, www.well.com and www.craigslist.com . There was a question that was raised about the issue of flaming - which is whereby someone responds or puts a hostile or derogatory comment in forums or via emails.
The second website was rife with flaming and yet 'The Well', even at first glance looked more professional, with people being polite with one another, more like a community. I think the differences stem from the fact that if you sign up for 'The Well', there's different type of membership options and as a member have to pay. So ultimately why would someone pay to flame. Even though with craiglist you have to register, it would be easier to be anonymous and therefore some people might take this as an opportunity. Also it seems like any information can be accessed and lurked on a larger scale with 'Craiglist'. I started looking through the website and within seconds i was able to reply to someones post by clicking on a link, which then opened up my hotmail account, with this persons email placed into a new email ready for me to send my reply. So it seems that you dont really need to register, unless you want to use the site properly.
Surely this would also bring up the issue of spamming. With the email available to a non member and no details entered into the site, all that could be used to trace me would be my hotmail account, but then again i could set up a fake email and use it for these purposes. If i wanted to it could be easily achieved.
Therefore you've got these two forums, who are completely different, as 'The Well' can't be accessed at all, unless there's a payment and a registration, the homepage states that theres 'non-anonymous here'. 'Craigslist' however brings up many issues; spam, flaming, trust, do these people feel a sense of a community and so they feel like they can trust people and stay logged onto the site? who knows. Maybe this site is a place where people like to mess around and cause arguments or maybe this is a culture thats been accepted. I know that i wont be using it.
Showing posts with label week 3. Show all posts
Showing posts with label week 3. Show all posts
Thursday, 12 February 2009
Week 3 Reading - Sherry Turkle
'Turkle's own metaphor of windows serves well to introduce the following samplings from her new book. Those boxed-off areas on the screen, Turkle writes, allow us to cycle through cyberspace and real life, over and over. Windows allow us to be in several contexts at the same time - in a MUD, in a word-processing program, in a chat room, in e-mail' (Wired 2008)
What Turkle is saying here is very true to my experience of the internet. When I'm on the internet i always find myself opening up Facebook first and once i've done checking up on my updates, instead of closing the window down, i leave it open and add a tab to go onto another website. So no matter what i'm doing, i'm accessing 'several contexts at the same time'.
'Computer screens are the new location for our fantasies, both erotic and intellectual'. This also can be true. Everything can be accessed on the internet, from sex, shopping and millions of information at a central point. People can say things that they might not in real life because they can be whoever they want and access websites which keep they're anonymity, which means that if they do have a fantasy, they can explore it freely without being judged. At first glance this might seem beneficial, but lets not forget that there needs to be regulations.
Wired (2008) Who Am We? http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/4.01/turkle.html
What Turkle is saying here is very true to my experience of the internet. When I'm on the internet i always find myself opening up Facebook first and once i've done checking up on my updates, instead of closing the window down, i leave it open and add a tab to go onto another website. So no matter what i'm doing, i'm accessing 'several contexts at the same time'.
'Computer screens are the new location for our fantasies, both erotic and intellectual'. This also can be true. Everything can be accessed on the internet, from sex, shopping and millions of information at a central point. People can say things that they might not in real life because they can be whoever they want and access websites which keep they're anonymity, which means that if they do have a fantasy, they can explore it freely without being judged. At first glance this might seem beneficial, but lets not forget that there needs to be regulations.
Wired (2008) Who Am We? http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/4.01/turkle.html
Topic 2 Week 3 Question A
Is withholding one’s identity ethically wrong?
If you were applying for a job and you put in a different name, age and address, this may seem unethical, plus it just wouldnt work within society. If everyone went around and everyday changed who they were, this would be wrong. Therefore why does this type of behaviour exist online. This isn't to say that when someone asks for your details you should tell them everything from bank accounts to how many pets you have, but people shouldn't live behind fake identities because this is where problems arise, for example pedeophiles. I think as a normal person, you should know when its safe and necessary to use your correct details. I use my details to shop on Amazon and i even bank online. I trust these sites to keep my identity safe. Just thinking back to applying to University; the majority of that process was done online and even if it wasn't, you would still have to put down elements of your identity regardless and trust who's viweing it.
Ultimately i don't think its ethically wrong to withhold your identity when you dont trust where the information is going, but i do think its ethically wrong when a fake identity or no identity is used in chatrooms in particular. Just because you might be talking to someone who you'll never meet, this doesn't mean that you should change yourself, most people wouldn't do that put into a real life situation, so why do it online?
If you were applying for a job and you put in a different name, age and address, this may seem unethical, plus it just wouldnt work within society. If everyone went around and everyday changed who they were, this would be wrong. Therefore why does this type of behaviour exist online. This isn't to say that when someone asks for your details you should tell them everything from bank accounts to how many pets you have, but people shouldn't live behind fake identities because this is where problems arise, for example pedeophiles. I think as a normal person, you should know when its safe and necessary to use your correct details. I use my details to shop on Amazon and i even bank online. I trust these sites to keep my identity safe. Just thinking back to applying to University; the majority of that process was done online and even if it wasn't, you would still have to put down elements of your identity regardless and trust who's viweing it.
Ultimately i don't think its ethically wrong to withhold your identity when you dont trust where the information is going, but i do think its ethically wrong when a fake identity or no identity is used in chatrooms in particular. Just because you might be talking to someone who you'll never meet, this doesn't mean that you should change yourself, most people wouldn't do that put into a real life situation, so why do it online?
Topic 1 Week 3 - Question E
Are online relationships the same as offline one?
Personally i dont think the relationships could ever be the same. There could be some similarities but as far as being the same goes, theres no way. Think of a conversation with someone on the phone, and then talking to that person face-to- face; theres some things you might say to them on the phone and not any other way, the conversation might be limited because of bad connection or the amount of credit you have, you might not be able to contact the person because their phone might be turned off. This would be the same as online, its asychronous; you could send someone an email and they might not respond to days and the response you do get might not be what you wanted.
Ultimately theres always the issue of people not being who they say they are online. In terms of online gaming, you've got people who might create avatars; a term that refers to an interactive representation of a human in a virtual reality environment. A person could change their name, their gender, their age etc. Therefore if a relationship was made through the use of avatars, there might be a possibility that its not the real them.
However Taylor that there's a 'tradition within online communities for online friends and gaming partners to get together for face-to-face meetings' (2:2006) Also there was an online newspaper article which shows how the chinese government 'will start real-name registration for online game players this year' (Peoples Daily Online january 2009). Therefore there are some controls within the web; to stop people creating false personalities, but this doesnt make online and offline relationships the same. It all comes down to the difference in communication, the interactivity, the navigation, its completely different.
Taylor, T, L. (2006) Play Between Worlds, Published MIT Press
Peoples Daily Online (2009) Online gamers have to give real names http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90781/90877/6575252.html
Personally i dont think the relationships could ever be the same. There could be some similarities but as far as being the same goes, theres no way. Think of a conversation with someone on the phone, and then talking to that person face-to- face; theres some things you might say to them on the phone and not any other way, the conversation might be limited because of bad connection or the amount of credit you have, you might not be able to contact the person because their phone might be turned off. This would be the same as online, its asychronous; you could send someone an email and they might not respond to days and the response you do get might not be what you wanted.
Ultimately theres always the issue of people not being who they say they are online. In terms of online gaming, you've got people who might create avatars; a term that refers to an interactive representation of a human in a virtual reality environment. A person could change their name, their gender, their age etc. Therefore if a relationship was made through the use of avatars, there might be a possibility that its not the real them.
However Taylor that there's a 'tradition within online communities for online friends and gaming partners to get together for face-to-face meetings' (2:2006) Also there was an online newspaper article which shows how the chinese government 'will start real-name registration for online game players this year' (Peoples Daily Online january 2009). Therefore there are some controls within the web; to stop people creating false personalities, but this doesnt make online and offline relationships the same. It all comes down to the difference in communication, the interactivity, the navigation, its completely different.
Taylor, T, L. (2006) Play Between Worlds, Published MIT Press
Peoples Daily Online (2009) Online gamers have to give real names http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90781/90877/6575252.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)