Virtual Ignorance?

A funny thought struck me while browsing threads today... specificly about assumptions

as (presumably) adult internet users, we have a certain level of knowledge, but where does it stop? what level is it safe to assume we can all communicate at? is there one? seems like there should be...

but take the recent 'discussion' over an avatar named "candida"... seems pretty clear what meaning was intended... or does it? being as it's a latin derivitive I looked it up... "clear and white"... I also caught references to it being used as a live persons name, the more commonly known fungus, and a few other offbeat things. oh the puns that can be made...

but it begs the question, why assume a meaning in absense of context? why jump to the most negatively percieved meaning, and then invent the most negative context available to go with it? for that matter, why not ask and get it from the horses mouth (so to speak)?

are we persuming less of our peers than we should? is it laziness? meanspiritedness? boredom? are we too rushed to consider any other angles/meanings/intent?

I think we all realize even in this english speaking forum, we are a world wide community of sorts. Differing opinions and different cultural views *should* be the norm and healthy for the conversation. I think the key word is tolerance, but there is more to it. Maybe tact.

Anyone who has worked with the general public can tell you: the general public is an idiot.

Taken seperatly, we are each rational and intellegent people for the most part. But for any thing you assume to be common knowledge, someone somewhere does not know it.

Let me give you an example: say we are talking about Azimov, Stephen King, Jim Butcher and P.J. O'Roark. You may or may not have heard of them all. I am pretty sure you know we are talking about authors. I would think at least a couple you would be familiar with and if you asked me what did Jim Butcher write I would think nothing of it. But out there, right now, someone has never heard of Butcher. Someone else has never heard of Stephen King (believe it or not) and someone else can olnly relate Azimov to the robot Sony made. They are probably not all the same person, but in the general public, they are all complete unknowns to someone. Thus: the general public is an idiot. If you have something to say to the general public it must all be stated. You can assume nothing.

dang never thought of it that way.... you make a very good point

by the way, who is stephen king?



OH i bet I know an author you prolly never heard of....

Aidan C. Bell

He was a friend of Drew Barymore's when she was young.

Heard a quote recently that about sums up the gist of this thread....

A Person, is intelligent..... 'People', are stupid.

I think what Yosef said is basically the reality in SL.....for the most part, we can connect as individuals because we will find some common ground, and being adults, probably be able to work around our differences...be they culteral or whatever. But....given the laws of numbers...since there ARE so many individuals using SL....we are bound to run into those who appear to us to be complete and total morons. It happens....and it happens IRL probably just as often if you work with or in general, deal often with the public.
One of the advantages....and disadvantages in SL...is lack of context. We tend to have discussion (initially) based on nearly total face value.....the typed word comes across much more literally then a spoken sentence. We lose inflections, voice tone, gestures....subtle facial expressions that are such a huge part of how we communicate. By the same token....this allows people to be anonymous and consequently, sometimes much more honest and open. Or....people lie thru their avatar teeth. But without all those other signals....well.... it's an entirely different angle on getting to know your fellow humans.

"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals, and you know it." - Agent K, "Men in Black"

I am not going to post anything more in this thread.

Pep (I promised someone I'd be good)

"AVERAGE" IQ is 100 - 50% of the population has an IQ below 100. That says a lot right there.

What I've discovered on SL forums more than others are assumptions of the never said kind or reading into other peoples posts things that were never said.

I've come to realize it can be a "lost in translation" type of thing, even if both parties speak English. Parts of the world have differing humor.

As far as Candida Flare with 7 posts as a name showing up in a thread ABOUT monogamy it wasn't that hard for my first assumption to be this was a joke poster. Not a malicious internet person, just a joking person. So, it could depend on how many posts and to what the title of the thread is that could make a person assume something is an internet joke. And I feel I have to spell out everything on this forum or it gets taken the wrong way so I will. A joke person, not a troll.

Now as far as other assumptions on this forum overall. I'm reading that a lot and it seems some people make some kind of big huff over something that was NEVER SAID. Why their mind is jumping to some of these conclusions is beyond reason.

I'm wondering if it's a lost in translation type of thing between Americans and English people as there are obviously some kind of communication issues/problems on this board. As in one continents joke is not on another. Or one perfectly harmless joking is not too another. Not to mention that those screaming for tolerance don't see tolerance as a two-way street.

A rule of thumb should be: Simply send a PM if you are not sure what the person was saying.

I am now finding it *very* hard to keep my promise . . .

Pep (Is severe provocation a valid defence)

In this rare case, I think so.

(Even though you missed the question mark. You missed the question mark! Does this mean you now have to be sarcastic to yourself??)

I think you'd need to take each incident up with a mod. But, I don't see a report to moderator button on my screen?

That little red triangle icon is the "report post to moderator" button.
<----------------------------------

Oh, thank you!

You certainly made your point to me! I had to look up Jim Butcher in the Wikipedia. From which the assumption might reasonably be made that I'm not very well read. And maybe I'm not, but for over 50 years I've averaged at least (this is a conservative estimate) a book a week. Sci fi and fantasy are my favorite genres. I just finished reading "Bag of Bones" by Stephen King and I'm about to start "Children of Dune". Actually I may have read some of Butcher's work and forgotten it.


It's a teaching of some Eastern religion that the ego has a need to establish it's importance by seeking battles it can fight to justify it's sense of self.



Just to show that I'm paying attention and to justify my ego's need to define itself by reviewing my own knowledge: I think that if 50% of the population have IQ's under 100 and 50% have IQ's over that would mean that 100 would be the "median" IQ, not the average.

"Median". "Mean" *IS* "Average".

LOL, <------------ that post right. It's median not mean when using averages. 50% below 50, not! Most of the people I know including myself average over 110 to 125. LOL Or even higher than 125 is the median for my family.

But, the word issue and nit picking like school children over a word or spelling makes this forum look stupid. What is the point of debating how a word is spelled or if the correct one is used? Life is short for crying out loud. I don't have time for that type of stupidity. And one's spelling is no reflection on one's intelligence, just as age does not reflect a persons level of maturity or immaturity.

/me a little sick of the nit pickies on here

Because it suits your argument. Context in a written debate is much harder to fathom than in a verbal debate.

but they pay our bills so we have to keep 'em.

What a great example of someone making themselves look ignorant while trying to show their knowledge! I refer to myself of course. I meant to type "median". I think "mean" came out because it had already appeared earlier in the sentence. And anyway LittleMe's point was perfectly valid I imagine there are about as many people with below average IQ's as there are with above average ones.

However this doesn't prove a lot without context What are you trying to say about low IQ's and how does it relate to Second Life?

Yes I see that a lot of posters in this thread have generalizations rather than assumptions.

If you come to a forum, which is supposed to be productive, you shouldn't come with an attitude of everyone is stupid but me or I need to stroke my ego here by cutting others down. Cutting others opinions down just shows that persons lack of maturity, so I don't see how it could do something for their ego?

Talk about generalizations and assumptions...

__________________________________________________________

My post was quoting this post above.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosef Okelly
Anyone who has worked with the general public can tell you: the general public is an idiot.

but they pay our bills so we have to keep 'em.

(along with others on Page 1, as I don't know how to do multiple quotes yet.)