Alli crack rebel poker juegos de azar jouer poker bruel poker table poker caribe paginas internet…

http://www.thenewsroom.com/details/311125/Science+and+Technology?c_id=kg

This is an article about a company that helps you track what is being said about you online. A great way to know if you are being trashed, personally or professionally and to be able to manage the comments in an adult manner.

Blogging is made for this, the The Family Romance: “…it’s easy to understand why adventurous young characters in American dramas almost never take their parents along. Unlike figures such as Aeneas, who leaves Troy carrying his father on his back and leading his son by the hand (the perfect image of the all-male family going forth to establish a new dynasty), the American pioneer of the family romance sets out with a band of non-related comrades his own age, who in turn become his new family, a much better, much more loving, much more worthy groups of folks than the family he (and sometimes she) has left behind. Thus, as new frontiers are tamed, resulting in a new and more ideal physical and governmental environment, the pioneer is rewarded with a new and more ideal familial environment to match.”

You might remember an email in the EGR round robin a couple of years ago when I addressed this. No one but Euan Semple I think it was took me seriously, but I was serious.

FWIW, I don’t know how to resolve this difference of perception about whether “Abuse like MeanKids is done by A-listers all the time” except by wishing for some statistically relevant data.

That’s trivializing my point, and you know it.

Abuse like MeanKids is done by A-listers all the time, and nobody cares unless the targets have A-list friends to make a fuss.

I’m not “extending” anything – and frankly, I think you know that too.

[Bah. Now you'll say "How anyone truly know what is in the mind of another ..." I shouldn't do this stuff. Can't win.]

I agree that there are ways in which the Web “intensifies the opportunities for bullying,” and I agree that anonymity and power imbalances are two biggies. But “intensifying the opportunities” doesn’t tell us how often the opportunities are seized. If we extend “bullying” to include the exercise of unbalanced A-Lister power, then it happens all the time, to one degree or another. If we confine bullying to cases like Kathy’s, I think it’s relatively rare, but we’d need actual research (not a conference and not a commission but a statistician with a plan) to decide it, because no one fish in the sea can tell whether it’s getting warmer just over here or all across the ocean.

So, I think there’s some actual agreement between us, as well as some healthy disagreement.

And by the way, yes, we should love one another. I’m sticking with that one.

I’ve already said my piece on the rest of the topic.

To jump up one level – I’m pre-emptively trying to defend against the following deflection algorithm:

Goal: Make the issue into a sermon about how we should love one another, as a diversion from any deep discussion.

Horn 1: Start sermon: “Bullying happens in real life. The web is no different. We should love one another. …”

Reply to horn 1: There are issues where the web intensifies opportunities for bullying, such as anonymity and power imbalances in audience.

[Digression - an acknowledged problem here is that feeds into the "Web Of Evil" narrative, as if there was *no* real life evil]

Horn 2: Continue sermon: “Prove it! I say no. We should have a study, a panel, a blue-ribbon commission, A CONFERENCE, where is the academic research at your fingertips, maybe the web is no different. We should love one another. …”

The underlying issue is the silliness of the sermon within a structure where A-listers bully others all the time. But I suppose self-referentially, my talking about it will do no good.

What is bullying? When is discourtesy out of bounds? Even, what obscenities should be barred? (I was amazed that so many Greens us the “F” word!)

My response has become similar to the Libertarians: when it becomes criminal. (The noose thing should be vigorously pursued.) Otherwise there is the personal filter, delete button, and ignoring. I often send off-list e-mails to newbies advising them to not feed the trolls. And occasionally get them when, in a moment of weakness (usually alcohol induced), I respond.

And, as a BoE member in a school which vigorously enforces antibullying policies, I support formal antibullying policies. They work. We don’t find a need for specific policies supporting gays, minorities, and other oppressed groups.

But the Iway isn’t a school. Nor is it really a community; it’s a mob. Mobs don’t have rules. Communities do. So any community can feel free to establish rules which are specific and clear when anyone joins seems valid.

That only works when an elite runs the community. The King of the website or the Ruling Junta of the domain makes and enforces the rules. IMO, based on years of experience, a democratic community in cyberspace will never be able to enforce any standards of conduct.

I do agree that A-Listers can do more damage by bullying than can a Z-Lister because, by definition, the A-Lister has more readers. That’s a potential for abuse. But I still don’t see the evidence that most or even many A-Listers are in fact bullies. (The same for Z-Listers.)

Does that help clarify it? Or am I too deeply askew?