| |
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
|
|
|
