Because None of Us Are as Cruel as All of Us – Boxxy

[kyser_soze]

I'm afraid I just don't see it with religious texts like the bible - they are too disparate, too self-contradictory and written over too great a time, plus they are set in stone in the way that a daily paper isn't, so they can't be a reflection (and a construction) of a shared experience and a shared response to events that are specifically selected for their relevance to a particular group; i.e. they can't act as a filter of current events in order to select and present them as part of the life-world of an imagined community.

But this is exactly how religious types use their texts! Islam and hassidic Judaism more so than Christianity because they're principle texts are still read in the language they were written in, but Christians will use the Bible as filter to understand current events, indeed, as shown in some US communities they use their religion to pre-filter external medias! That's the most closed imagined community you can get!

However, I see where you're going, and would ask you this question - how does one select a newspaper?

 

[Fruitloop]

I do agree with you on the above, but I think that with the bible etc it's not something about the text itself and its material/technological nature that's doing the filtering, it's the surrounding community and its exegesis of the sacred texts that does that - often using new media to get its particular interpretation across these days.

Anderson was talking about the dailies before they were as politically factionalised as they are today, when there was more of a sense that some opinions were held by all right-thinking men or something (an idea that lives on in some elements of the law etc). I do see the point that these days there is a degree of self-selection in the choice of which particular paper to read, although even so I reckon the construction of an imagined community of people who think like that is still an important function of the publication. In fact it's an important plank of the propaganda value of a newspaper, the idea that other people from the same demographic think one thing and not another, and that this way of thinking is often constructed oppositionally, as being the reverse of what 'media luvvies', 'Guardian readers', or whatever the popular epithet of the day is, think.

 

[kyser_soze]

Will reply later, but broadly agree

 

[Santino]

So do you guys agree with diamond's basic argment that the internet as a technology has created the behaviour known as 'trolling' in humans, rather than simply magnifying/augmenting an existing behavioural trait?

It is not clear to me that those options are really distinct. Or rather, you could argue for either depending on how you define 'existing trait'. If the existing trait is understood as loosely as 'being a cunt', then clearly humans already had that capacity. People used to write poison pen letters, and spread malicious rumours, and generally bully each other quite a bit. Fairly obviously, the specific form of behaviour we call trolling is only possible in an interactive environment of sufficient anonymity and leniency, but whether it is sufficiently distinct to be classed as a 'new' form of behaviour is unclear.

It's like the nature/nurture argument about lots of other forms of human behaviour. The answer is usually 'a bit of both'.

 

[i'mnotsofast]

Consequences will never be the same!

 

[Gromit]

4chan comes from the same place in the human psyche as the holocaust or maybe somewhere worse.

and Urban is soo pure? I refer the thread to any "Hi I'm new thread" for for Urban act just as crass toward individuals.

Its not just 4chan. Tis the whole internets.

 

[tar1984]

Consequences will never be the same!

ED article for this too, if anyone is interested.

http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Jessi_Slaughter

 

[DotCommunist]

Aww I'd forgot about boxxy. She posted a message telling those bastards at /b/ off later, wearing no make up and still managing to be adorably cute and silly. Long live, long live. The internet cesspool may hate you but that is a medal to wear.

 

[Captain Hurrah]

Get your hands out of your pants Dottie.

 

[Crispy]

and Urban is soo pure? I refer the thread to any "Hi I'm new thread" for for Urban act just as crass toward individuals.

Its not just 4chan. Tis the whole internets.

urbans can give newbies a hard time. they don't organise mass RL harassment campaigns against children.

 

[kyser_soze]

ED article for this too, if anyone is interested.

http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Jessi_Slaughter

As if Jessi hadn't had enough, she released two new videos of herself crying hysterically while her father (a distant relative of Yosemite Sam) and his awesome child-molester mustache going completely ape shit bonkers, screaming at the computer over the IRL and OL trolling they've just endured, despite previously stating: "You know what? You don't faze me!" while addressing her 'haters' in her first video. Throughout the new videos, Jessi cries that: "her life is ruined" and that she's "going through hell", while her father spits out instant classics such as "you dun goofed", "I've backtraced your emails" and that the "cyberpolice are on their way". The result of these actions means that "the consequences will never be the same."

Normally, we find fears about kids on the Internet the product of technophobic hysteria. But this case is a very good argument for why parents should at least be vaguely aware of what their kids are up to on the Internet. Is your 11 year-old girl embroiled in an underage sex scandal with the lead singer of a popular emo band? Is she threatening to shoot people on YouTube videos? Maybe now is the time to invest in good parental control software before she becomes a meme.

I fucking love the ED

 

[tar1984]

Yeah ED pretty much nailed this one.

 

[Captain Hurrah]

cyber police, lol.

 

[revol68]

I was hoping for some new Boxxy videos, she was cute as.