-
Hello!
Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.
Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....
Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.
Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.
Chat room - listen up, please
- Thread starter Rich Z
- Start date
- Status
Roy Munson
New member
I understand all of your points except this one, Dale. I mean, he opened this site to the public, didn't he?jazzgeek said:
-------------------------------------
A couple of points of my own:
1. Engage in chat as if everyone including Rich Z. will read what you're writing. This may turn out to actually be the case.
2. "Pack mentality" isn't the most shameful of mindsets. Humans have had this mindset for at least a few million years, and probably much longer. It's nice to think that we should all be highly individual and too sophisticated to engage in pack behavior, but this isn't always the case. It's ok to be human. Or at least I'm not going to chide anyone for it.
jazzgeek
The Rule Of Thirds.
Yep, he did, and we have to register to post, as in most any online forum - primarily for security purposes. But this isn't a "by invitation only" kind of situation you may find in some chatrooms or websites.Roy Munson said:
So it may be a matter of semantics; if it's open to everyone, it's not open to a "chosen few". I guess that expresses it better - but I'm not going to make any Venn Diagrams. :grin01:
Agreed, and I failed to mention in prior posts. I'm not attempting to undermine or hold back any of the fun/creativity/foolishness that takes place in chat. Hell, that's my primary purpose for going there to begin with. I can't speak for Rich, but I don't think that's what he's asking for, either.
While I can agree with your point to an extent, I'm trying to differentiate pack mentality for mere survival and/or societal organization from pack mentality which can exclude "perceived interlopers".
In those few million years that you've mentioned, we've gone from small organizational collections (extended families and tribes) to larger ones (kingdoms and democracies), and therefore, the "packs" have evolved. I'd venture to say that an online chat room should display more elements of the newer "packs" than the older.
Dean, since I know your religious viewpoint is atheistic and you lean towards "pure science", you might get a kick out of reading Michael Shermer's The Science of Good and Evil, a great book that opines that religious and ethical behavior has evolved of the course of time, as collections of people (societies) have changed, taking into consideration the environmental pressures that any living organism does as it evolves.
I found it to be an enjoyable read, but then again, I'm such a geek.
regards,
jazz
jazzgeek
The Rule Of Thirds.
Gah, Dean......I forgot to pose a question to you from my prior post.
I dare say that at this point, you've made more comments and have distributed and also received more rep points than Robert Wallace did in his stay here. I'm wondering what your response would be if you were to face the same "pack behavior" he did when a number of people here made him the object of scrutiny that they did.
Looking forward to your response...
regards,
jazz
I dare say that at this point, you've made more comments and have distributed and also received more rep points than Robert Wallace did in his stay here. I'm wondering what your response would be if you were to face the same "pack behavior" he did when a number of people here made him the object of scrutiny that they did.
Looking forward to your response...
regards,
jazz
Roy Munson
New member
I just heard that guy on an NPR call-in show recently. I enjoyed listening to him, so I planned on reading that book.jazzgeek said:
And yeah, we may have evolved a more sophisticated pack structure, but the interloper/outsider is still not always appreciated. In fact, he is usually regarded with suspicion until he has made himself as much like us as possible. :shrugs:
Robert Wallace was a little before my time here, but I did look at that poll. A few months ago there was a negative poll directed at a single individual on Fauna, and it disgusted me too. Even if R.W. had posted for the sole purpose of boosting his post and rep count, I can't see why anyone would really care.jazzgeek said:
I like to support the enthusiasm that prompts a person to post photos of their animals. I like to see the photos too. Much of the time, like R.W., my replies are fairly terse. I'm never disingenuous; I've seen few corns that I didn't like.
But your hypothetical is difficult for me to imagine. I'd like to think that my contributions here have been more significant than a bunch of "nice snake" posts. If you look at my last 50 posts, you'll find that they're fairly diverse. I can't see a large number of members turning on me like they did R.W.. But he had his supporters too. I only wish that I could have been there to stand with them.
In my first six months here, I had a fair number of detractors. I posted a lot of photos of my snakes, and there were a number of members who publicly (and privately) attacked me for being an attention-whore who got off on the compliments I received from the photo thread replies. I've been attacked for post count, rep usage, etc., etc.. There was a time when I really thought about leaving this place for good. 95% of the people here were great, but the 5% started getting to me. I'll never be able to thank Misty/Taceas enough for setting my head straight during that time.
But things are different now. I don't get attacked any more. My post count and rep power are embarrassing to me if I look at them, but I try not to. :grin01: I post what I want to, when I want to. But the biggest thing that is different is that I now NEED this place, and I don't mean emotionally. I'm going to need lots of buyers for lots of high-end corns in the future. I can't imagine doing it without this place. Generally, I'm not a money-minded guy, but I can't deny that the prospect of future sales tempers everything I write here. I've heard it said that if you have good stock, people will buy from you regardless of personality. However, if two members here have good stock, and one of them is an a-hole, who do you think I'm buying from?
I don't know if that answers your question, Dale. :shrugs:
jenkva
Buzz-Buzz Ziggety-Zag
This is straying from the subject of the original post but it might be a good subject for "Controversial Topic"? It would be very interesting to see what the replies areRoy Munson said:In my first six months here, I had a fair number of detractors. I posted a lot of photos of my snakes, and there were a number of members who publicly (and privately) attacked me for being an attention-whore who got off on the compliments I received from the photo thread replies. I've been attacked for post count, rep usage, etc., etc.. There was a time when I really thought about leaving this place for good. 95% of the people here were great, but the 5% started getting to me. I'll never be able to thank Misty/Taceas enough for setting my head straight during that time.
Roy Munson
New member
Dale asked me a question that was relevant to the direction this discussion had turned. I had a tough time answering his question, but felt that the information I posted would help clarify my position. I'm not really interested in re-hashing and evaluating that period in my membership here. But I don't own a copyright on controversial topic threads, so feel free to start your own on this.jenkva said:This is straying from the subject of the original post but it might be a good subject for "Controversial Topic"? It would be very interesting to see what the replies are
Serpwidgets
New member
Do I remember Robert Wallace? Of course I remember him. When he came into chat he would ask how our hypo pewter project was coming along. Had he still been around this year he probably would have gotten first shot at the one hypo pewter I did let out of the house. So, I'm sorry to undermine your argument but I liked him and did not want to see him run off. When that idiotic thread came up I mocked it. I have always maintained that the rep point system is bad. I still wish it would either be turned off or turned into a non-point-based feedback system.jazzgeek said:
Last edited:
jazzgeek
The Rule Of Thirds.
All that, and then some. :cheers: I really had no agenda in posing the question(s) to you, other than a curiosity of your viewpoint, as I respect and enjoy your views on the boards here. I wasn't looking for any validation, or for you to concur with anything I've stated here.Roy Munson said:
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. :grin01:
regards,
jazz
jazzgeek
The Rule Of Thirds.
DANG IT, Chuck!!! Ya had to go and edit. I SO wanted to talk about my midlife crisis and all that stuff that got baleeted. It was going to be a whole interwoven tapestry of hair plugs, disco medallions, a red sports car, a red swollen prostate, and a road trip to Arizona to hit on Jynx (a redhead - gotta stay with the theme), all written in a Hunter S. Thompson "gonzo" style. I was even going to throw in a few "Young Frankenstein" references for the villager stuff.Serpwidgets said:
:cheers:My purpose in linking and referencing the Robert Wallace thread was not to "lump you in" with the crowd in that incident. It was to exemplify and point out that a group mindset can and does exist in an online environment, if your contention was to the contrary when you stated "This is just ridiculous".
If what was "ridiculous" was your belief that we're only left with the options you listed above, then the Robert Wallace citation is moot. Since you didn't mention which of the two it was in your response, I won't presume. And if your assertion that "This is just ridiculous" applies to neither of the two cases I stated, well, I'm all ears.
Given that, is my argument undermined? Dunno. :shrugs:
As for the reputation system: while I enjoy the feedback, I don't derive my worth from it. Reading the "comments" on the User CP, and knowing who they're from, is of more merit to me than the points ever will be. So agreed, if the current system went away, I wouldn't care.
regards,
jazz
jazzgeek
The Rule Of Thirds.
Watch it. You're next on the list after Jynx. I'll even "Binaca" for you.carol said:Will you two get a room?
It's just sankes.
*runs away*
:duck:
Gah, who am I kidding? I'd just use you for your employee discount. I still lust after that Beretta 686. :crazy02:
regards,
jazz
- Status