 | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Courtney writes:
> This whole thing has gotten me thinking -- Matthew was out to prove a point,
> right? Matthew is also a jerk and has serious problems, right. But, just
> because he carried himself *very* poorly here doesn't mean he might not have
> something valuable to say to us. I'm just trying to think if there's
> anything about this community that is out of whack, like he suggested.
Ok...I occasionally babble, I'm long winded (and unrepentently so...), and I
am a fanataical advocate of commonly disparaged themes. That's my
contribution to the wackiness of this community... (hey, every village needs
an idiot or madman)
> I was talking to a friend yesterday about the whole deal - someone who has
> slipped away from Lugnet intentionally but unnoticed. That person feels
> that the community is elitist, and from that person's perspective I
> understand. They feel that when they post here people ignore them, that
> they're a good candidate to kill a thread, etc. I don't like it that my
> friend has had that experience here.
A couple of anecdotes for you...
I had a friend who was Hip-hop DJ that used to love "breakin' out the
bricks" for a couple hours after we would get back from consuming adult
beverages at the local club. He would always make comments to me about not
lettin "the crew" (our other drinkin buddies) know that he liked to build
spaceships when he was intoxicated. He admitted to having a Lego stash that
he would hide from his roomate and girlfriend. In a phone conversation, I
told him about Lugnet. In a subsequent conversation he said, "it's cool and
a little weird" that there are ALOT of Lego builders and websites devoted to
Lego and that people spend so much time building. He commented that he was
a little embarassed being almost 30 and liking the same toys as his son. In
reference to LUGNET, he said, "hey, I like Star Trek too, but I am not a
Trekkie...those people scare me" Ultimately, Lego is a guilty pleasure for
him and he feels no compulsion/passion to do more than play a little and
look at some pics.
Locally, I know a guy that is an avid builder, but he is very private, kinda
stubborn, and has no desire to really become part of an on-line group. I
pointed him towards LUGNET and he was thrilled to go through the mech and
space links. He likes pictures, but could care less about ANYTHING else.
He thinks discussing Lego is like watching sports... If you can go outside
and do it, why watch someone else. He also commented that building a
website probably too much longer than building anything you would put on it.
A quote "If you are gonna build, BUILD! Don't just talk about it" (this led
to a lengthy spirited discussion about the merits of sharing ideas)
In these 2 cases, the people had different priorities and LUGNET did not
fulfill their needs... will it ever, maybe...time will tell. Lugnet was not
elitist per se, it just didn't meet their needs. Overall, I have pointed
dozens of auction winners and acquaintences towards Lugnet, 90% of which
have viewed it as a Godsend. Some others have commented that they lurk on
LUGNET because:
They only like to build/collect sets+ not create MOCs
They don't have a huge collection
They don't have a digicam or a website
They don't wish to "compete for attention"
They believe LUGNET is primarily a "U.S. thing"
Too many others know much more about Lego than they do
SNIP
> I certainly don't want to see anyone hurt
> by this group of people. Unfortunately we had a very upstanding member of
> this group leave a couple weeks ago from frustrations.
> So I open it up for thoughts on the issue, and am willing to discuss and
> examine just the same myself. Anyone?
Ok to discuss this issue and elitism consider a few points:
Do you value one member's opinion above another?
Do you read certain posts in a thread because "todd" or someone else wrote it?
Are you skeptical of strangers?
Do you rate the opinions, MOCS, etc. of established members higher than
"newbies" or "right" or "better"?
Do you seek approval of one individual or group over another?
Are you disappointed if no one comments on your post in a thread?
Do you think some members get preferrential treatment?
Do you think a group or person excludes or discourages other individals or
groups?
Do you like to interact w/ likeminded indviduals or groups?
There are many more related questions, but these are just a few. I can
honestly say YES to all of the above since I have been on LUGNET.
For my part...
I will always look at a craigo creation (because I have been impressed by
his work)
I try to catch all of the posts in . Pirates from Lndsay (because I learn
something) and Richard Parsons because I like the dry wit and interesting
pictures
I will value some opinios over other because they are consistent or
insightful (Gary Istok's commentary on elements)
I cringed when I saw matt posts here because i remember the flame war that
buried rtl as a viable discussion forum and brought me here
I think some members are worshipped, coddled, and praised... some have
earned a place of respect due to their contributions and knowledge (which is
the natural order of things) and some have endeared themselves to the masses.
I believe that is the nature of groups and group interactions. Every
community has various components, factions, leaders, followers, etc. The
United States is 1 country with 50 seperate divisions which are further
subdivided into counties,cities, towns, neighboorhoods, citizens, etc.
LUGNET is an on-line community of Lego enthusiasts with how many sub-groups,
themes, clubs, etc? I can say the same thing about my family, my church,
the local pub, or my neighborhood. The essence of which is the desire of
one person to share with other likeminded individuals. Elites, cliques,
clubs become a natural evolution. Life ain't fair, Schtick happens, and
contrary to some beliefs, everyone does not necesarily like everyone else.
However, that does not mean that we should ignore the contributions of
others or disrespect them. Why not offer encouragement to "newbies"? Why
not be open minded? Why not act as a community? (say Hello to the aussies
or read .space instead of just castle once in awhile.)
I think their has been an ABSOLUTELY AMAZING evolution/revolution in
building in the past couple years. This may both encourage and discourage
others. "newbies" and "de-lurkers" have been coming out of the woodwork for
quite awhile. Why not foster a friendly environment that kindles a passion
in the ambivalent or says "come on in and sit awhile"? (I don't mean 12
steps, group therapy, "let's all hug" and cume-baya here folks... I would be
the first to hurl = )
> And someone slap me if I'm crazy. I'm writing this because I think that
> what we saw yesterday was pretty serious, and if the community has anything
> to do with it I'd like to see that change. If it was all Matthew and
> whatever he was smoking, that's all fine and dandy I s'pose.
>
> Peace all...
> --
>
> Tim Courtney - tim@zacktron.com
In reference to the Matt issue... My objections were to the antagonistic
manner in which he presented himself. I think critique and commentary are
essential elements of this hobby, but he approached the process in a
negative/destructive way. I don't wish to ban criticism, debate, or
discussion in favor, I just think we can do it in a positive+friendly way.
The Ultimate lesson of Matt Moulton can be a positive one...
THE STRENGTH OF LUGNET IS THAT IT IS A COMMUNITY...
The fact that the whole is much greater than the sum of its parts is evident
here. Why not rejoice in it? That which Matt sought to destroy may yet
become stronger from his passing.
John
> http://www.ldraw.org - Centralized LDraw Resources
> http://www.zacktron.com - Zacktron Alliance
>
> ICQ: 23951114 - AIM: TimCourtne
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Robert-Blaze Kanehl writes:
> Ok...I occasionally babble, I'm long winded (and unrepentently so...), and I
> am a fanataical advocate of commonly disparaged themes. That's my
> contribution to the wackiness of this community... (hey, every village needs
> an idiot or madman)
Hey don't worry about it - I personally enjoy your posts anyways :)
[...]
> In these 2 cases, the people had different priorities and LUGNET did not
> fulfill their needs... will it ever, maybe...time will tell.
Both of those cases are understandable. Because of the word 'Community' here -
there will be ALL types, even types who don't find it useful to devote time
here. Hopefully they'll find some benefit from its existance, but if they
don't, let them build in peace.
[snip elitist examination questions]
I can probably answer yes to all of those questions too.
In my niche here (CAD) there are a lot of times I'll value the opinion of a
long time contributor over that of a newbie - because I know and trust the
person. Not that it's right.
Yes, I'll read certain peoples' posts first, for whatever reason.
One thing is I do get disappointed if I don't get replies - that might not be
an ego thing, but just the way my personality works. I work off of feedback.
No one replied to my Spamcake To Go rendering I posted last week, which was
surprising to me because it was a hit at Kidvention, and with every Lugnut
I've shown in person. But that doesn't mean that people haven't seen it and
haven't enjoyed it.
I think groups exclude people based on signal to noise ratio a bit myself. In
groups like space, you'll get the serious MOC making people, and the 'newbies'
(usually younger) who will say 'why don't you make this?' 'lego should make
this?' 'zapp pow bang!' - and those generally get looked over. Its
unfortunate, but are those people really constructive to the group? Is this
acceptable, because its the way societies function?? Dunno...
And I could go on...
> I think some members are worshipped, coddled, and praised... some have
> earned a place of respect due to their contributions and knowledge (which is
> the natural order of things) and some have endeared themselves to the masses.
Yep, of course.
[snip factions paragraph]
> Schtick happens, and
> contrary to some beliefs, everyone does not necesarily like everyone else.
Unfortunately not. I've got people here I don't like - but its part of life
that I have to deal with them in my interactions here. That doesn't
necessarily make me elitist, but it doesn't necessarily make me not elitist.
> However, that does not mean that we should ignore the contributions of
> others or disrespect them. Why not offer encouragement to "newbies"? Why
> not be open minded? Why not act as a community? (say Hello to the aussies
> or read .space instead of just castle once in awhile.)
I think that when we see newbies with talent we instantly absorb them and they
become 'one of the gang.' (I'm sure if Dan Jassim had a computer and access,
he'd fit right in) But there are some who struggle at first, and have to make
their way on their own.
When I started on RTL 4 years ago, I wasn't instantly accepted. I was a 14
year old kid with no real knowledge of how to communicate effectively without
offending people online. My website was less than stellar (Zacktron..heck,
its not killer now even ;) - I was the little brat of the group. For certain
views, I was practically flamed out of there.
So I took a breather, gathered some resolve, and came back, and made the best
of it. One thing lead to another - alongside this I had been playing with web
stuff etc. and the opportunity came to take on the ldraw.org project. I did
it because I liked making sites and this needed a site. I didn't do it
because I am super knowledgable of LDraw or LCAD stuff - I knew more than most
but still, I couldn't tell you half the utilities to this day and what they
do. And POV, me? Forget it :)
Now for some, I'm one of those people who you say is practically worshipped.
For others, I'm a noisemaker, but everyone has their opinions. I don't think
its practically comfortable to be worshipped, nor is it the easiest being high
profile in the group.
But despite all of this, I've been trying to teach myself not to act elitist
or like an elite towards others, even newbies.
> I think their has been an ABSOLUTELY AMAZING evolution/revolution in
> building in the past couple years.
For certain!!
> This may both encourage and discourage
> others. "newbies" and "de-lurkers" have been coming out of the woodwork for
> quite awhile. Why not foster a friendly environment that kindles a passion
> in the ambivalent or says "come on in and sit awhile"? (I don't mean 12
> steps, group therapy, "let's all hug" and cume-baya here folks... I would be
> the first to hurl = )
I agree with you there.
> The Ultimate lesson of Matt Moulton can be a positive one...
>
> THE STRENGTH OF LUGNET IS THAT IT IS A COMMUNITY...
> The fact that the whole is much greater than the sum of its parts is evident
> here. Why not rejoice in it? That which Matt sought to destroy may yet
> become stronger from his passing.
And hopefully it will do just that.
-Tim
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Courtney wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Robert-Blaze Kanehl writes:
> > Ok...I occasionally babble, I'm long winded (and unrepentently so...), and I
> > am a fanataical advocate of commonly disparaged themes. That's my
> > contribution to the wackiness of this community... (hey, every village needs
> > an idiot or madman)
>
> Hey don't worry about it - I personally enjoy your posts anyways :)
Aye. And remember, this is a discussion forum. Some very good posts don't
lend themselves to further discussion, and so don't get much (or any)
follow-up. And some very crummy posts get tons of followup.
> In my niche here (CAD) there are a lot of times I'll value the opinion of a
> long time contributor over that of a newbie - because I know and trust the
> person. Not that it's right.
Not that it's wrong either. Trust is an important issue. I don't have
time to sit down and thouroughly process through everything posted on
LUGNET. I depend a lot on familiarity with the people I'm reading messages
from, or responding to. This can make it harder for new people to 'break
in', but it's not impossible.
Communication skills help a lot. If a post shows very poor communication
skills, it's going to take more to get me to pay attention to it. Is that
elitist? Maybe. It's just another time issue -- I don't have time for
everything, and I'm trying to get (and give) the most value for my time.
> Yes, I'll read certain peoples' posts first, for whatever reason.
There are two people I used to look for, for responses to "Look at my MOC!"
posts. If Terry K. or Jeremy S. responded with a "that's great!" post,
then I'd go look at the MOC. They never steered me wrong.
> One thing is I do get disappointed if I don't get replies - that might not be
> an ego thing, but just the way my personality works. I work off of feedback.
> No one replied to my Spamcake To Go rendering I posted last week, which was
> surprising to me because it was a hit at Kidvention, and with every Lugnut
> I've shown in person. But that doesn't mean that people haven't seen it and
> haven't enjoyed it.
I'm still looking at it -- I immediately made it my background/wallpaper.
:)
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Steve Bliss writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Courtney wrote:
> > In my niche here (CAD) there are a lot of times I'll value the opinion of a
> > long time contributor over that of a newbie - because I know and trust the
> > person. Not that it's right.
>
> Not that it's wrong either. Trust is an important issue. I don't have
> time to sit down and thouroughly process through everything posted on
> LUGNET. I depend a lot on familiarity with the people I'm reading messages
> from, or responding to. This can make it harder for new people to 'break
> in', but it's not impossible.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say this... there is *nothing wrong*
with being elitist... as long as it's a meritocracy. In large part, that *is*
the way things operate in a lot of groups, there are people who most people
know are contributors, or who know who they are talking about, and whose words
tend to get more weight.
That is a good thing.
And what's great about compartmentalisation is that there are so MANY groups
for people to participate in and for them to shine in. Experts in one are only
novices in others.
Where things go a bit wrong is where cliques form, based on not merit, but
that sense of closeness that shuts out valid contributors. Fresh ideas are
good. There's a balance in there somewhere. This is a great topic, I wish I
had more time.
++Lar
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> And what's great about compartmentalisation is that there are so MANY groups
> for people to participate in and for them to shine in. Experts in one are only
> novices in others.
Three cheers for compartmentalized dorks! >;-D
-John
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> > And what's great about compartmentalisation is that there are so MANY groups
> > for people to participate in and for them to shine in. Experts in one are only
> > novices in others.
>
> Three cheers for compartmentalized dorks! >;-D
I don't think is the right group for that...
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
>
> > Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> >
> > > And what's great about compartmentalisation is that there are so MANY groups
> > > for people to participate in and for them to shine in. Experts in one are only
> > > novices in others.
> >
> > Three cheers for compartmentalized dorks! >;-D
> I don't think is the right group for that...
Sorry, couldn't resist when I saw the word "compartmentalisation". I'm sure you
remember that little flap in RTL about a year ago...
Actually, the post was just simply my little way of posting "I agree". Unless you
want to argue whether my comment belongs in this group, in which case the discussion
would;-)
-John
>
>
>
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
> Steve Bliss wrote:
>
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
> >
> > > Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > >
> > > > And what's great about compartmentalisation is that there are so MANY groups
> > > > for people to participate in and for them to shine in. Experts in one are only
> > > > novices in others.
> > >
> > > Three cheers for compartmentalized dorks! >;-D
>
> > I don't think is the right group for that...
>
> Sorry, couldn't resist when I saw the word "compartmentalisation". I'm sure you
> remember that little flap in RTL about a year ago...
>
> Actually, the post was just simply my little way of posting "I agree". Unless you
> want to argue whether my comment belongs in this group, in which case the discussion
> would;-)
Sorry, I just left off the winkey. ;)
It takes a compartmentalized dork to argue about the right place to
celebrate compartmentalized dork-dom.
:)
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Steve Bliss wrote:
>
> It takes a compartmentalized dork to argue about the right place to
> celebrate compartmentalized dork-dom.
:-) Thanks for the chuckle, Steve!
-John
> :)
>
> Steve
| | | | | | |
